|
1462
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Dealing with SHA-256 Collisions
|
on: March 07, 2011, 04:54:22 PM
|
RE: changing things now "just in case" :
No, I think it would be dumb to switch hashing algorithms or public/private keylengths now, for at least two reasons:
1. You'd just be switching from older technology that has the advantage of being well-tested and "battle-hardened" to something newer that you THINK will be more secure.
2. There are much more important things to work on. If you know enough about crypto to evaluate whether Whirpool really is fundamentally more secure than SHA-256, please apply your knowledge to the problems we have right now, like making users' wallets more secure against trojans and malware...
OK, agreed. That answers first part of my question. So about the second part: What about making public/private keys longer without changing hashing algorithms ? PS. Truecrypt uses Whirlpool almost from the beginning, i don't know if that makes the algorithm more trustworthy or not however. PS2. I just thought that by changing Hashing algo from SHA-256 to SHA-512 we are essentially increasing security, because that is simply the same algorithm, just with longer output. |
|
|
|
|
1463
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Dealing with SHA-256 Collisions
|
on: March 07, 2011, 04:06:15 PM
|
I suppose I could try to double-spend with two transactions that hash to the same value... and hope that the merchant's bitcoin accepts Transaction Version 1 while the majority of the rest of the network accepts Transaction Version 2 (where I pay myself). But if SHA-256 ever gets close to being broken I'm sure bitcoin will be upgraded so new clients only accept upgraded hashes for new blocks/transactions.
Wouldn't changing the hash to SHA-512 or 512-Bit Whirlpool let's say.... from block 250.000, before anything is broken yet a wise move ? Also, we could double private/public key lengths... just in case. I mean that would give us extra reaction time in the event of quantum computers are invented or something else got broken... |
|
|
|
|
1465
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Bitcoin.org Redesign (mockups inside)
|
on: March 07, 2011, 02:22:08 PM
|
The color version looks good. I'd prefer to have the download links at the top, though, now they just break the flow of the page.
+1 I would also like download links in vertical column, rather than horizontal bar. i'd say remove windows (zip) option. just offer it on some separate download page.
+1 |
|
|
|
|
1466
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Do we need Forum moderators
|
on: March 07, 2011, 11:31:20 AM
|
|
I join the ones who say we don't need moderators but 4-chan style janitors.
What annoys me is the everlasting mess and opening 10 threads on the same topic. That should be cleaned up, and the older threads locked with URL pointing to the new versions etc.
|
|
|
|
|
1472
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Will deflationary model be a hindrance to general acceptance of Bitcoin?
|
on: March 06, 2011, 09:36:57 PM
|
From an environmental perspective it might not be bad if people held on to their stuff longer, but economically it's quite bad.
If you have a different truth I'd love to hear it, but in essence this is mainstream economics, and it does seem quite reasonable.
It seems to me that you were reading some of today's economic theories which claim that any deflation is bad for economy. They are lies, natural monetary deflation itself can be good for economy, and the history of the world proves it without any doubt. Using inflation to run entire economy is very new invention, it has maximum 200-300 years. Before that there were only bullion - based, bullion - backed deflationary economies (with some small exceptions from the rule perhaps). |
|
|
|
|
1473
|
Economy / Economics / Re: WTH? why a sudden drop by 10 cents?
|
on: March 06, 2011, 09:28:38 PM
|
I Can Haz™ a detailed explanation, please ?
Just a feeling. Well, I think companies might not like this at all. Well of course they won't like it. But if somebody/some people act anonymously, they are powerless to stop this. However i think that as long as anons don't overdose with the stickers (vandalism), the companies won't really care much. Anon power. |
|
|
|
|
1474
|
Economy / Economics / Re: WTH? why a sudden drop by 10 cents?
|
on: March 06, 2011, 09:20:20 PM
|
Here's one underhanded way it could be done:
1. Get a stencil made which says "We Now Accept Bitcoins" and apply it to every advertising billboard you can find.
2. Customers ask these businesses about how to pay with Bitcoins.
3. Businesses recognize the demand and support Bitcoins.
4. Success!
I think it will backfire? I Can Haz™ a detailed explanation, please ? |
|
|
|
|
1475
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Will deflationary model be a hindrance to general acceptance of Bitcoin?
|
on: March 06, 2011, 09:13:35 PM
|
Wait!, what?
So, just how am I going to get anyone to accept a pay-cut?
Reverse the question. How is everyone going to make you accept a pay-rise when there is inflation ? It's the same problem, just different person will have to deal with it this time. And as an investor, why should I take a risk and invest my money in any business if I get "safe interest" by doing nothing?
That somehow didn't stop americans on the wild west (1800s). It was a deflationary period, and simultaneously one of the greatest periods in terms of wealth increase in society. So how did they do that ? It seems that is not a problem. Perhaps you should only do smart & high-profit investments - investments which will bring you greater profits. Doing not-so-good investments becomes useless, because you can earn more just by keeping money in a safe. So this encourages better, wiser, smarter, more profittable investments than inflationary environment. For "safe" investments, just hold on to your money. No need to work hard. Simply wait. I like bitcoin, and I think it has potential as an internet currency, but I doubt it'll be a major player in the financial market.
We shall see. |
|
|
|
|
1476
|
Economy / Economics / Re: WTH? why a sudden drop by 10 cents?
|
on: March 06, 2011, 09:05:36 PM
|
Now I'm considering a stenciling campaign, Banksy style.
Here's one underhanded way it could be done: 1. Get a stencil made which says "We Now Accept Bitcoins" and apply it to every advertising billboard you can find. 2. Customers ask these businesses about how to pay with Bitcoins. 3. Businesses recognize the demand and support Bitcoins. 4. Success! I haven't heard such an awesome & nifty idea in months... That is simply genius. |
|
|
|
|
1477
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin - A Movement?
|
on: March 06, 2011, 09:02:26 PM
|
Wait... Won't the FEDs supply you with missing cash to keep you running in case of a bank run ?
I thougth that's the point of the reserve.
Also, there is the "too big to fail" thing.
I believe this was before the time there was a FED. No way... so what are central banks and fractional reserves for ? Aren't they supposed to supply a single bank with money in case of a bank run ? |
|
|
|
|
1478
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Will deflationary model be a hindrance to general acceptance of Bitcoin?
|
on: March 06, 2011, 08:59:35 PM
|
This process could take decades, but I doubt that it really will.
As we move toward the future, the saturation of technological adoption is being reached at an ever faster pace. Therefore, if bitcoin is a pivotal technology, then it will reach adoption at a rate that will exceed the ability of governments to react. Governments reacting quick qnough to stop a technology ? Highly doubtable. Just check out the following examples: Internet, P2P, BitTorrent, ThePirateBay... Government was never there on time to stop developments of that things. |
|
|
|
|
1479
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin - A Movement?
|
on: March 06, 2011, 07:55:58 PM
|
Fractional reserve banking is a bluff, everything goes along fine until someone calls the bankster's bluff.
A free market doesn't bail out bluffers and losers with tax-payer extorted loot ... we could all go to Vegas and get Barney Frank on the line when we're in the hole for a few hundred billion.
If enemy banks think you're bluffing, they will try to spread rumors in attempt to shut you down. So the more fractional reserve banking you did, the more likely you will get shut down by a bank run. Wait... Won't the FEDs supply you with missing cash to keep you running in case of a bank run ? I thougth that's the point of the reserve. Also, there is the "too big to fail" thing. |
|
|
|
|
1480
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Frustration at the Digital Money Forum
|
on: March 06, 2011, 07:54:05 PM
|
The masses wont use bitcoin till famous people mention it.
WINNING !!!
Actually, it's enough that one large investor or veeeeeeeeery famous person starts using it. What is happening now is that everybody who is watching bitcoin is waiting for the first big fish to take the risk. If the big, "alpha-male" fish takes the bait, the herd will follow. After that it will be a massive, unstoppable snowball effect (and bitcoin may rise 10-fold or 100-fold in few days after they announce that they jump on BTC bandwagon). If a 'big fish' like you describe were to jump into bitcoin, such as Warren Buffet (unlikely), they would be wise to not announce that fact until well after they have accumulated as much as they intended to. Considering that much of the reason that such 'little fish' follow 'big fish' is that they are perceived to be wise in matters of money, I would be shocked to find out that any such 'big fish' openly advocating for Bitcoin before they were well entrenched. You are correct, however even without announcing the rumours would spread like wildfire. So the effect would be essentially almost the same, except delayed by few days. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
