Bitcoin Forum
June 22, 2017, 06:26:25 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.14.2  [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 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 ... 409 »
281  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / BU's "honest miner" security model on: February 28, 2017, 04:25:44 AM
Repeating a lie won't make it true.
It doesn't make it true, by the pure meaning of the "true" word, but it can help to make everyone believe a lie for a longest time of being able to gain a profit.

Currently, no one is paying me to talk about BU or other Bitcoin implementation, no one paid me in the past, and I still nearly fully invested in the "Bitcoin token", on private keys that I fully own.
I haven't any full contract with any company and/or invested on them. So I feel myself in a better position than yours about denying this possibility of having an incentive of gaining profit by repeating lies.

Even though you and BU insist on ignoring how _every version ever released_ works-- you don't even need to look to the operation of the system to disprove your belief that Bitcoin does whatever the majority of the hashpower wants-- The whitepaper itself specifically speaks to the potential for a dishonest hashrate majority:

Quote
As such, the verification is reliable as long as honest nodes control the network, but is more vulnerable if the network is overpowered by an attacker. While network nodes can verify transactions for themselves, the simplified method can be fooled by an attacker's fabricated transactions for as long as the attacker can continue to overpower the network.One strategy to protect against this would be to accept alerts from network nodes when they detect an invalid block, [...]
"simplified method"

The quote refers to the SPV clients, while instead we are talking about full nodes verification.

Full quote:
Quote
8. Simplified Payment Verification
It is possible to verify payments without running a full network node. A user only needs to keep
a copy of the block headers of the longest proof-of-work chain, which he can get by querying
network nodes until he's convinced he has the longest chain, and obtain the Merkle branch
linking the transaction to the block it's timestamped in. He can't check the transaction for
himself, but by linking it to a place in the chain, he can see that a network node has accepted it,
and blocks added after it further confirm the network has accepted it.

IMAGE

As such, the verification is reliable as long as honest nodes control the network, but is more
vulnerable if the network is overpowered by an attacker. While network nodes can verify
transactions for themselves, the simplified method can be fooled by an attacker's fabricated
transactions for as long as the attacker can continue to overpower the network. One strategy to
protect against this would be to accept alerts from network nodes when they detect an invalid
block, prompting the user's software to download the full block and alerted transactions to
confirm the inconsistency. Businesses that receive frequent payments will probably still want to
run their own nodes for more independent security and quicker verification.

(emphasis is mine)


Quote
The text you quote, "He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules"-- is speaking to a world where network nodes validate and so miners ability to profitably break the rules is very limited. This incentive assumption is far weaker in the BU world where all users strongly trust miners.
I think that you are trying to mix the full node situation with the SPV situation.

It is suggested by always to wait more confirmations on an SPV clients.

This is now, and it will be the same on a possible BU world. Again, nothing will change.

There is also a big difference on "trusting the miners" and "trusting the legit miners". BU nodes trust the legit miners.
Where is the difference? Legit BU miners aren't going to blindly accept blocks bigger then their EB settings.
Because this damaging the users and belief in the Bitcoin system will damage their income.

So, the possible attacker (from the quote of the bitcoin.pdf you have reported) will just mine huge blocks that will go nowhere.

BU nodes instead (with the current default setting, that the user can freely change) aren't going to accept bigger block without 12 consecutive blocks after it. (AD setting)

So, at the end, to be more precise, in the "current BU world" (with default settings) there is the basic idea that there can't be an attacker that is going to be able to do and pay for an attack of 13 consecutive blocks (the first one bigger + 12 small blocks)

If someone thinks that a 13 block attack is still possible ... there is also this coming:
Parallel Validation: https://github.com/BitcoinUnlimited/BUIP/blob/master/033.mediawiki (being developed here)
The first block downloaded and validated wins.
So, the smaller and easier to be fully validated the better.


I think that if segwit hadn't the fake block size increase (but everything else), now it could be already activated by the larger majority of the miners.

282  Economy / Exchanges / Re: Advcash | a new "anonymous" bitcoin debit card [EUR & USD] on: February 28, 2017, 02:50:50 AM
I advise you to use BTC-e to deposit on Advcash.

Bitcoin -> BTC-e -> EUR or USD -> BTC-e code -> Advcash
283  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / BU's "honest miner" security model on: February 28, 2017, 02:19:10 AM
I did and it's sitting with "Your comment is awaiting moderation.". I cannot "archive it" because it won't even be displayed in the first place without his permission.
Good to know, I'll trust you on this Wink

Quote
I think this point is especially dishonest coming from a BU developer, given that their whole security model is based on a strong assumption that the aggregate behavior of miners is honest.
Oh well, this the basic on how the Bitcoin system works. I know and remember that the first time you saw Bitcoin you didn't agree on this, but still it didn't break in the past years, claiming the opposite is unproven.
This is again a good history case/proof of the opposite of what you are claiming: http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miners-ditch-ghash-io-pool-51-attack

BU model is the Bitcoin model, no changes on its root.

Bitcoin.pdf
Quote
The incentive may help encourage nodes to stay honest. If a greedy attacker is able to
assemble more CPU power than all the honest nodes, he would have to choose between using it
to defraud people by stealing back his payments, or using it to generate new coins. He ought to
find it more profitable to play by the rules, such rules that favour him with more new coins than
everyone else combined, than to undermine the system and the validity of his own wealth.
With nodes here Satoshi was meaning miners, because they can mine with CPU power.
284  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Post your SegWit questions here - open discussion - big week for Bitcoin! on: February 28, 2017, 01:50:52 AM
Finally, the untrue claims in this blog post are being plastered all over rBTC but due to actions by that subreddit's moderators I am unable to post a counterargument-- not just on rbtc-- but anywhere on Reddit.  Yet they happily scream about far less limiting actions a censorship.
Then why don't you post it directly on the blog? What a better place to show to everyone that he is wrong?
You can archive it if you are afraid of a possible censorship from him, and show it then to everyone.
285  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: Prima transazione bitcoin - delusione :( on: February 28, 2017, 01:45:20 AM
Guardare su blockchain.info va bene.

Nel caso ad un certo punto sparisca anche da li, contatta il supporto bitpanda, la rinvieranno probabilmente con una fee maggiore.

Questa discussione ti sarà utile:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1515457.0
286  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: Prima transazione bitcoin - delusione :( on: February 28, 2017, 01:25:51 AM
Il network a causa di problemi da chi ora tiene le redini del suo sviluppo è bloccato in un problema ancora non risolto.

La fee messa credo che sia abbastanza, ma potrebbe capitare che ci metta anche più di 24 ore.

Mi spiace che tu sia arrivato su Bitcoin proprio in questo momento.
287  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Post your SegWit questions here - open discussion - big week for Bitcoin! on: February 27, 2017, 11:26:14 PM
SegWit and technologies built on it are grossly oversold
http://www.deadalnix.me/2017/02/27/segwit-and-technologies-built-on-it-are-grossly-oversold/
288  Local / Annunci / Re: Raiblocks - Moneta che punta sulla scalabilità - Conferme istantanee - No fee on: February 27, 2017, 10:39:36 PM
Per la marea di proxy che ci sono è difficile, comunque per Tor, anche li gli exit node non sono cosi tanti.
Si può certamente limitare, ma gli exit node finiscono anche presto Wink
289  Local / Accuse scam/truffe / Re: CNT Centurion: una scamcoin tutta italiana on: February 27, 2017, 06:37:06 PM
Il moderatore qua non è un lavoro, è volontario, che faccio nel tempo libero.
In questo forum in particolare (inteso nel suo insieme), almeno in parte, per scelta dell'amministratore (che non sono io) cerca di garantire una forte libertà di parola, cosa non presente in altri forum italiani, dove spesso vi è un modo di fare più "fascista". Che non so se sia il termine giusto, ma credo che molti comprenderanno.

Quindi, quello che fanno qua i moderatori, è limitare lo spam principalmente. Pure il trolling è in parte permesso, finchè non diventi appunto spam che vada a togliere la volontà di leggere da parte degli utenti.

Quindi ancora, posso anche liberamente dire che si, per me questo centurion è una truffa, inutile, un clone di cloni, e l'unico modo perchè possa andare avanti è tramite il furto/raggiro di altre persone, e che in generale mi fate tutti schifo voi promotori Smiley

In un forum più comune, questa discussione sarebbe rimasta, ma sarebbero stati cancellati tutti i messaggi dei vari promotori, quindi potete solo ringraziare Wink
290  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: [LIST] Free EU bank accounts that you can be opened directly online on: February 27, 2017, 04:16:12 PM
https://www.dukascopy.com/swiss/english/banking/savings-account/
(all FX firms are required to be licensed banks in Switzerland)
https://www.dukascopy.com/swiss/english/forex/FX-Interbank-Account/

I see anyway that "If you reside outside Switzerland, deposit USD 5’000 minimum".
291  Local / Alt-Currencies (Italiano) / Re: [TOPIC UFFICIALE] Ripple (p2p market / exchange) on: February 27, 2017, 04:07:26 AM
Nuova release 1.2.2
https://github.com/ripplerm/ripple-wallet
https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/665-ripple-wallet/?page=3#comment-27944
292  Local / Servizi / Re: Advcash - Prepagata ricaricabile con Bitcoin - Verifica non richiesta - NEW EUR on: February 27, 2017, 03:02:17 AM
Se hai fatto 5 tentativi, 5 volte ha fatto la verifica della carta. Quei soldi dovrebbero tornare nei prossimi giorni.

Come già scritto, consiglio di usare i codici BTC-e per depositare sulla carta.
293  Local / Accuse scam/truffe / Re: CNT Centurion: una scamcoin tutta italiana on: February 27, 2017, 02:50:24 AM
Questa moneta non ha NULLA di interessante/utile rispetto ad altre già sul mercato, quindi come già detto, l'unico modo per tirarla su è che vadano a cercare di gonfiare il prezzo con richieste fatte sempre da loro con i soldi rubati con lo schema ponzi Smiley

Certo non è detto che riescano in questa cosa.
294  Local / Esercizi commerciali / MOVED: Dash 12.1 Aggiornare !! on: February 27, 2017, 02:46:00 AM
This topic has been moved to Alt-Currencies (Italiano).

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1784923.0
295  Local / Annunci / Re: ☘☘☘☘️☘️[ANN|ICO]EDGELESS CASINO - 0% Edge & Full Transparency☘️☘️☘️☘️☘️ on: February 25, 2017, 05:42:35 PM
Sapete se all'uscita avrà un già un mini-bot integrato?
Comunque, sarebbe interessante se tale progetto, all'uscita, avesse già il supporto di quest'altro: https://bot.seuntjie.com
296  Local / Annunci / Re: ☘☘☘☘️☘️[ANN|ICO]EDGELESS CASINO - 0% Edge & Full Transparency☘️☘️☘️☘️☘️ on: February 25, 2017, 02:44:06 PM
Ho cercato nella discussione la parola "velocità", ma non ho trovato nulla.
Vorrei capire meglio qual'è la velocità di gioco di questo sistema.
Si basa sulla velocità di conferma dei blocchi di ethereum, o può essere anche più veloce?
297  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: Transazioni lente: come scegliere le fee prima, o come sbloccarle dopo on: February 25, 2017, 01:42:41 PM
Anche questo è ottimo:
https://estimatefee.com/
298  Local / Off-Topic (Italiano) / MOVED: Grosso problema con errate fee on: February 24, 2017, 11:21:50 PM
This topic has been moved to Italiano (Italian).

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1803578.0
299  Local / Guide (Italiano) / MOVED: sistema di pagamento acquisto bitcoin on: February 24, 2017, 08:00:39 PM
This topic has been moved to Italiano (Italian).

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1795682.0
300  Local / Discussioni avanzate e sviluppo / MOVED: ...fee troppo basse... on: February 24, 2017, 03:41:15 PM
This topic has been moved to Italiano (Italian).

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1803022.0
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 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 ... 409 »
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!