I'm not agreeing with Vlad's wild conspiracy theories, I'm just pointing out that such an attack is technically indeed not as infeasible as some seemed to imply. See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=248645.msg2640864#msg2640864Also as was pointed out earlier there are several comparatively efficient potential strategies to gain >50%, invest a few $M in ASICs, run major mining pools then subvert them, subvert and/or DDoS existing pools.. I disagree with him calling that an attack to "manipulate the source code", but I can see how that sort of attack would be very damaging. I can't imagine anyone spending the money to do it though. Well effectively it would dictate code/protocol changes the minority of the network has to follow if they don't want to lose their coins, that's basically what "manipulate the source code" means, as jl2012 points out Winklevoss uses the word "manipulate", which means "to influence or manage shrewdly or deviously".
And yeah I agree the effect would be very damaging, can't really imagine anybody doing it either though, given the still enormous resource requirements. "If they don't want to lose their coins"? If a gov gets 51% of the hash power and changes the protocol, my client will tell its blocks to fuck off and yet I'd still be able to spend my coins on the old network... The blocks my client would accept are the ones created with the non-gov client And if nobody switch to the gov client, the gov would hash a blockchain that is used by no one except itself |
|
|
|
|
I think you missed the sarcasm. Or maybe me.
Anyway, Allahcoin did a much better job.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't get how many you're OK to send me, but that's fine either way. Address in signature, thanks.
By the way, the post in which I ask where is the flaw in my code is an answer to a post of DeathAndTaxes where he said he found one. Which he deleted.
|
|
|
|
|
Where is the flaw?
0NUG rewards after 7 years is part of the protocol Vlad wanted to get fixed
If this is not wanted anymore it's only a matter of deleting 4lines
That doesn't change the fact that I did exactly what Vlad was asking for
|
|
|
|
Like I thought block 250 isn't supposed to have a zero reward: Fair launch(allready past) Define "fair". the block reward was 0 coins up to block 249 except for block 1 and 2 which were premine blocks of 1.1 million apiece i've set a tentative fork for block 6000 to allow time to fix everything and test it. its a mess right now but i'm fixing it. As I'm the one who fixed the code, I am entitled to receive the 0.2BTC right? |
|
|
|
|
This means the file doesn't exist. Check the path you wrote.
|
|
|
|
From posts, I think it is "super blocks possible only after block 250 and before 7years". Then thef's solution is still wrong.
You sure? At first glance, without noticing the { } On the > 250 clause, I too thought the random was outside the >250 clause. Did you too overlook the curlybrackets there? -MarkM- Yes I'm sure, unless the protocol makes the reward 0 NUG for block height=250. I believe rewards start at 250, not 251. |
|
|
|
int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees, uint256 prevHash)
{
int64 nSubsidy = 0 * COIN;
if(nHeight == 1)
nSubsidy = 1100000 * COIN; //.5% Public Wallet Premine
else if(nHeight == 2)
nSubsidy = 1100000 * COIN; //.5% Coin Owner Premine
else if(nHeight < 250)
nSubsidy = 0 * COIN; //No Coins awarded for the first 250 blocks (fair launch)
else if(nHeight > 250) {
nSubsidy = 49 * COIN; //Standard 49 Coin Reward
std::string cseed_str = prevHash.ToString().substr(8,7);
const char* cseed = cseed_str.c_str();
long seed = hex2long(cseed);
int rand = generateMTRandom(seed, 100000);
if(rand > 50000 && rand < 50011)
nSubsidy = 10045 * COIN; //The VGB Protocol Random 250x Block Award
}
if(nHeight > 14726880) // no block reward after 7 years
nSubsidy = 0;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
If a programmer can confirm this is a VGB fix the .2 BTC IS yours, bro.
I'm not sure about what you want. From posts, I think it is "super blocks possible only after block 250 and before 7years". Then thef's solution is still wrong. A correct code would be this: int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees, uint256 prevHash)
{
int64 nSubsidy = 0 * COIN;
if(nHeight < 250){
if(nHeight == 1)
nSubsidy = 1100000 * COIN; //.5% Public Wallet Premine
else if(nHeight == 2)
nSubsidy = 1100000 * COIN; //.5% Coin Owner Premine
else nSubsidy = 0 * COIN; //No Coins awarded for the first 250 blocks (fair launch)
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
if(nHeight > 14726880){ // no block reward after 7 years
nSubsidy = 0;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
nSubsidy = 49 * COIN; //Standard 49 Coin Reward
std::string cseed_str = prevHash.ToString().substr(8,7);
const char* cseed = cseed_str.c_str();
long seed = hex2long(cseed);
int rand = generateMTRandom(seed, 100000);
if(rand > 50000 && rand < 50011)
nSubsidy = 10045 * COIN; //The VGB Protocol Random 250x Block Award
return nSubsidy + nFees;
} |
|
|
|
santacoin?? what about nuggets  That would be pretty ridiculous |
|
|
|
Thanks for your input. I disagree. I think bitcoin has too many things lacking but I give it props for creating a whole new industry.
"I don't see anyone but techies buying coins for their features and most features can be turned on at any point via a hard fork so its not really a big issue." So which is it? No one cares about features, and they can always be added later, but bitcoin doesn't have enough features? Interested in the answer to this Techies care about features. The masses obviously don't care or they'd jump from bitcoin to PPCoin or another coin with way more better features. I'm talking about the MASSES, that's who's coming for dinner after the bitcoin ETF. But don't get me wrong, if I would launch a coin I'd look for the best cutting edge features at the time to make it the best possible. But not so much cause I think people will drop bitcoin for it, that's just not happening but simply because doing hard forks later sucks and if you're gonna do something make it the best you can. But all the features in the world won't get your coin to even 50 cents. If you look at litecoin and bitcoin it was pure timing and chance. Whatever people decide to jump on next - herd mentality which is why a great name is so important. People buy what they know. This + https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=256460.0= I needed a good laugh, thank you  |
|
|
|
I never saw this...
What version of Python do you use?
Does it crash with a bad passphrase too?
Did you try with another encrypted wallet?
Is the wallet huge?
Python 2.7.5 Same error with bad passphrase. Same error with another encrypted wallet. Wallet is about 4.4 MB. Amount of addresses probably in the hundreds. I'm sure I answered this post earlier! I don't get what happened... What hardware is pywallet installed on? Small, like a RPi? Is there something special written on the console before the segfault text? Would you mind sending me an empty, encrypted wallet that can reproduce it? Just installed the packages on Win Vista. No obvious install errors. The web interface comes up fine. When I try to dump the wallet, I get the error "Error in dump page". Any ideas? Thanks! Also, on the "Info" page, I try "Print the balance of a Bitcoin address", and get "Balance of <address> : Page not found". Thanks for reporting What is written on the console before "Error in dump page"? And indeed, I forgot a character, thanks! The update is on its wayUpdated, you can upgrade to the last version. Maybe try the auto-update function, top-right of the pywallet page. |
|
|
|
|
You can send because it is valid, but it is impossible to get the corresponding private key (ie redeeming the money)
|
|
|
|
|
Bottle caps are not garbage, it's art
|
|
|
|
Gambling is never wise to do
Correction: Sports betting is never wise to do! I lost 20BTC on sports thats 99% of the reason I am so jacked about this! But I agree Don't correct him, sports betting is the exact same thing: you always lose at the end |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
