Would it be even remotely possible to force the change in sha256 bitcoin algorith to something else that asic and fpga devices couldnt compute?
We started off with a bitcoin that anyone could use and now were forced to buy stuff we dont really want.
I realise that there are some ppl that allready invested in asic and fpga, but ton off ppl are unsatisfied with this.
Do U think btc should move away from sha256 and let "normal" people the chance ?
Even if there was an algorithm change, someone would create an ASIC Bitcoin miner for the new algorithm. If you change the algo to repell custom hardware producers, you will do so every now and then. Result would be some mistery miners that still do custom hardware for their benefit under the radar so the algo keeps stable longer. Please don't hurt those that are more into bitcoin than anybody else. Please don't hurt those that cast our beloved algorithms in silicon. |
|
|
|
Old one is way better. Is the rubix cube copyrighted?
Yes, that is why a new one is needed. It's not urgent though. I was wondering when you would be running into this issue since I first saw the explicit Rubics-white-center-with-text but how about fixing the white center and changing the hue of the whole thing? Or making two center pieces blue? With 2 center pieces of the same color it would obviously not be a Rubics cube   |
|
|
|
Ok, for the record, when I made this post, bitcoinwireless.com had the launchrock.com favicon and as I did not realize the launchrock reference but only the huge red "W" in bitcoinWireless, I took it for the bitcoinwireless favicon.
(and yes, I'm slightly surprised to see a "we provide a solution for for charging your phone with 300 companies worldwide in some days"-"company" to use some shady 3rd party service for the official rumors page.)
Huh? Launchrock is not shady and it only lets people sign up. You have to understand launching this is not easy, we need to get 120 countries all ready at the same time. We are poised to launch before the weekend hopefully, but that could change. Thanks Hi Yankee, so back in May you were searching beta testers. How is the beta test going? Why would you need a coordinated global start? Why not start right now in one country? Which weekend exactly did you mean in your post last month? |
|
|
|
BTC born at a time when people all over the world are eager to save more after financial crisis, so it is right on the spot. Currently people are still save in USD since they feel it is still backed by the most powerful country in the world, but sooner or later they will realize that BTC is better than USD.
Fixed that for you. This might be a personal animosity but "Fixed that for you" is slowly becoming an issue in this forum. Miss-quoting people without even bothering to mark the changes gets me slightly mad. |
|
|
|
Perhaps thats the solution then. Remove all need for understanding or training. Only release the client to the public on a proprietary devise.
That is not bitcoin at all. It is more like MintChip. http://mintchipchallenge.com/. Bitcoin is about putting the end user in control and for that one needs a Free Libre Open Source Software OS. I sincerely hope to have a dedicated not proprietary device for my bitcoins at some point. (From my bitcoinqt, bitcoinspinner (android), schildbach (android) and various hosted wallets I don't know if bitcoinqt (on my developer/gamer/everything linux laptop that I carry around) or spinner (on my developer android that I barely carry around and that has only work-related apps installed) is the safer place to put my money. Right now I have half on my laptop and half on cold storage and keyloggers scare me every time I type in my 12 char password. Backups have more like 35 chars passwords.) |
|
|
|
Casascius provides hosted wallet security level. At least to the degree it is verifiable from outside. Please don't share the private keys of your life savings with anybody. |
|
|
|
This is a brilliant idea! Although I would suggest "weusecoins" more then "bitcoin.org".
I would definitely suggest tu use something with the word bitcoin in it. Maybe bitcoin - better money or free money, ... People that follow a link that they have no clue what it is about, will as well google a word and with this word being bitcoin, the message is clearer for those that know a little bit. Imagine somebody asking in a round of friends/the person who gave him the bill "what is weusecoins.org?" over somebody asking "what is bitcoin?". |
|
|
|
This is totally normal Bitcoin-behavior, those swings are just more rare than last year. Which is 98% pure speculation driven anyway. ..Which brings me to question your motives for your long post: FUD? How many $ are waiting on your Gox? :-P
FUD, not really. Just contributing my analysis to the discussion, maybe it is valuable to someone  In fairness I'm skinned for cash this month so I can't invest in more bitcoins. In my situation, it is in my personal interest for bitcoins to skyrocket not plunge. And as I wrote, I'm confident this is just a blip. Still, 10% of USD value lost in two weeks is a considerable amount, depending on the scale of your investment, of course. Last year the daily movement was 10-20%. At least in my memory. Kind of helps digesting "blips". |
|
|
|
50mbps!? What ISP are you using and how many arms and legs are they charging you for that!? right now I pay ~$50 for 24mbps if only i had FIOS in my location  It's Comcast, and the charge is $115/month if I remember correctly. In Munich I have 100mbps for some 40/month  |
|
|
|
Every single transaction that is included in a block is going to be stored on tens of thousands of computers forever;
until pruning comes along and I'm very very sure it will. storing all the information about addresses with 0$atoshi in them is just waste of disk space.
also "tens of thousands of computers forever" could be disputed. Bet in 5 years from now, full nodes will be down to less than 10k either because bitcoin became obsolete or too high traffic for most people. I disagree. Bitcoin blockchain growth will be linear while technological innovation and progress will be exponential. At some point, the Bitcoin block chain will be no bigger deal than a simple word document. 1MB (max block size) * 6 * 24 * 365 = 53GB. That's the maximum growth of the blockchain per year. We already have 3 TB HDD's, so those'll last for 56 years. And in 56 years, we should theoretically have 268 exabyte HDD's, which would last, for all intents and purposes with regards to Bitcoin, indefinitely. And if you want to talk about bandwidth, it's the same story. I now have 50mbps cable service available to my residence. 5 years ago, I only had 12mbps available. 10 years ago, I only had 768kbps dsl available. So bandwidth is basically following Moore's law as well. In 5 more years, I should have 300mbps service, etc, while the bandwidth requirements of Bitcoin will remain the same, at 53GB/year (or 13kbps). Maybe the barriers to do a full node will decrease but the incentive to do so decreases just as well. With a Bitcoin Spinner style (Mike Hearn(?) suggested to have full nodes do the book keeping for the connected thin clients with variable anonymity towards that full node by querying a superset of the own keys at this and other nodes. Such a solution would have all the privacy and security the average user might want at a fraction of the costs of running a full node. |
|
|
|
|
For me, the most surprising change was that my view on speculators got way more differentiated. Before, speculation was evil. Now black sheep pump and dump aside it is a service.
|
|
|
|
Every single transaction that is included in a block is going to be stored on tens of thousands of computers forever;
until pruning comes along and I'm very very sure it will. storing all the information about addresses with 0$atoshi in them is just waste of disk space.
also "tens of thousands of computers forever" could be disputed. Bet in 5 years from now, full nodes will be down to less than 10k either because bitcoin became obsolete or too high traffic for most people. |
|
|
|
the idea is good, too bad dogisland doesn`t keep an eye on the site to protect users and remove/ban the obvious scammer accounts
bitcoinary.com btcjam.com every bitman for himself hey, thanx for the link! looks like something serious although I wonder if Brasil will be a good place to base Ƀ-business in. |
|
|
|
One of the larget threats is posed by mining botnets.
Hmm, as some smart observer pointed out earlier the point of mining is to secure the network from attack. What's bitcoin's problem with botnets again? The problem with botnets is twofold: 1) a botnet causing many users a high electricity bill might bring bad reputation to bitcoin 2) a huge botnet with an algo that runs on CPU might be used for a democracy51% attack |
|
|
|
Concerning power consumption isn't it better to go ahead with rather rare ASICS than a lot of CPUs/GPUs?
The amount of resources put into mining will be about the same as the block reward. It may be more on the energy side, more on the raw material side or more on the profit for the producer side. From an ecological stand-point I prefer profit for the hardware producers and hope this area will yield enough profit so they don't lock competition out with patents and other dirty weapons. |
|
|
|
I only voted yes, because I hope down the road they will use a higher bit hash algorithm such as SHA 512 or if one comes along 1024. Not to undermine ASICS and FPGA's, or upset the decentralized balance of mining but to increase the key space for private keys and bitcoin addresses to make it even harder to brute force someones address, because 40 quadrillion years is to damn short!) sure, and I hope SHA256 will turn obsolete in a way that rig producers can produce future-save rigs, so fast hardware doesn't turn obsolete at some random we-switch-the-algorithm-day. Maybe SHA512 will also co-exist for a year or so. Why not. |
|
|
|
Ever bought some usb stick at the corner with some gimmick? Bitcoin mining could just be such a gimmick if production prices drop due to mass adoption, so for sure you will get cheap bitcoin mining equipment at every corner later next year if you don't change the protocol. Changing the protocol in ever shorter intervals to stop that trend is totally pointless as with the current $ rates >=2 companies built ASICS with a 1 year time to develop for customers buying them for a ~1 year life span. Changing the protocol in 2 years intervals would stop these businesses. With $100/Ƀ this 2 years might be just 1 year. FPGA have much shorter development cycles and aren't in every home neither. Should we agree on a new algorithm every 3 months? Also changing the protocol should happen at a schedule so it is no hurting any product currently being developed. Rendering the investment of the most passionate Bitcoin miners worthless is very crazy. Rendering the development costs of the most passionate Bitcoin mining gear producers worthless would be a very sad thing. Rendering the brands of mining companies worthless is a damage I would take to get to proof of stake. I say let it happen. |
|
|
|
|
I seriously hope we will get to proof of stake with a virtually vanishing transaction fee. Mining does not serve the purpose to make some people rich. It *only* exists to secure our all money of the future and I would be very sad if we ever had to defend bitcoin against claims about it consuming 10% of all energy produced by humanity just because it turned into the dominant currency before block subsidies dropped enough or before we turned away from proof of energy wasted.
|
|
|
|
Thanks! I needed some good news after all the vapor ware Seriously, with all this announcements stuff and people screaming "prepare for massive run on bitcoin", it feels like a huge pump and dump thingy. Some pictures of people actually bringing to live something is a refreshing contrast, although the people behind the one and the other might overlap
|
|
|
|
Hey All, BitInstant is sponsoring the 3 day Money2020 conference in Las Vegas this week. I'm also doing a panel on Virtual Currency and Payment Monday evening. Erik made sure we got placed next to Paypal   L to R: Roger Ver, Charlie Shrem, Erik Voorhees awesome, in 2030, someone will look at this photo and say: "wow, look how young they look. And: who is paypal?"Like this one
 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
