 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]
|
> Electrum wallets may be tricked into accepting transactions of BitcoinXT or some other hostile hard fork. I think this is not true. Don't they use redundancy to mitigate this issue? > Another way to synchronize a wallet would be to download full blocks and/or point the wallet to your own full node. Maybe we can add Neutrino from Lightning Labs? I didn't do much research on it myself, but from what I heard it's sufficiently private and can be added to Electrum? Nevertheless it's a lot of coding. > I've heard a story of a tourist travelling through rural South America with a laptop, every couple of days at the cheap hostels they stayed they would run Bitcoin with -blocksonly to catch up. Completely workable. I'm doing the same for years all over the World. > This is basically a proposal for an improved lightweightness of Electrum server, the goal is to > keep all the nice UI Building a nice UI would be less of an effort then building this gateway. > usability The improved useability derived from the nice UI goal, so the same comment applies. However the useability will be drastically worse, because the user has to run a full node gateway or a full spv node gateway. > hardware wallets, multisignature, offline signing, etc features of Electrum but with better privacy Valid. > and reduced resource requirement.  The resource requirements go to the roof, because the user would have to run a fullnode gateway or a fullspv gateway. About Type 2: fullspv gateway There is no need for custom coding if one can push through fullspv mode into Bitcoin Core: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9483Because I built it myself into HiddenWallet, I would highly discourage anyone from trying it. It turns out competing with the performance of Bitcoin Core is a dead case. There are way too many microoptimizations there, I found running a fullnode more convenient than running my fullspv node. (500MB memory usage vs 2GB memory usage, plus CPU spikes.) |
|
|
|
|
> Today I have generated new bitcoin wallet using NBitcoin and I found that it was having already balance present in it.
NBitcoin is a library. One cannot "generate a wallet" with it. Do you mean `new Key()` code had a collision?
|
|
|
|
Hi, I am going to make a (hopefully huge) testnet mixing test via HiddenWallet/ZeroLink. https://github.com/nopara73/HiddenWallet/https://github.com/nopara73/ZeroLink/I'd like to direct people who wants to participate to a testnet faucet site. For various reasons the mixing requires to be started from bech32 addresses, however there is no testnet faucet service that would work with bech32 addresses. Would you consider adding support to it in yours? |
|
|
|
I am publishing ZeroLink I hope you will like it. I won't waffle here, I just insert the abstract. https://github.com/nopara73/ZeroLink/Abstract
While fungibility is an essential property of good money, Bitcoin has its limitations in this area. Numerous fungibility improvements have been proposed; however none of them have addressed the privacy issues in full. ZeroLink is first to offer protections against all the different ways a user's privacy can be breached. The scope of ZeroLink is not limited to a single transaction, it extends to transaction chains and it addresses various network layer deanonymizations, however its scope is limited to Bitcoin's first layer. Even if an off-chain anonymity solution gets widely adopted, ultimately the entrance and exit transactions will always be settled on-chain. Therefore there will always be need for on-chain privacy.
Ideal fungibility requires every Bitcoin transaction to be indistinguishable from each other, but it is an unrealistic goal. ZeroLink's objective is to break all links between separate sets of coins. ZeroLink presents a wallet privacy framework coupled with Chaumian CoinJoin, which was first introduced in 2013 by Gregory Maxwell. A mixing round runs within seconds, its anonymity set can go beyond a single CoinJoin transaction's if needed, and its DoS resilience presumes a transaction fee environment above $1 Bitcoin.
Hopefully, ZeroLink will enable the usage of Bitcoin in a fully anonymous way for the first time. |
|
|
|
I'm really curios with your book, because it has some interesting subject. But is it easy to understand for newbie ?
It is definitely newbie friendly! I was working very hard to extend/revise the first chapters to be more understandable for everyone. If you make a physical copy of this book I will certainly pick up a copy. Please keep us informed as to any publishing info.  Please keep us informed as to any publishing info. It will be translated and published in China. We don't know too much about it at this point. Nicolas told me a publisher contacted him and he gave the rights to them to publish it. I would also like to note he is not going to be financially benefiting from it, but it's ok, since they will create publicity more publicity, that's good enough for us. |
|
|
|
I think this would work as a pure-regex solution: ^0*(1?[0-9]|20)?[0-9]{0,6}(\.[0-9]{0,8}0*)?$This is a good starting point, but it is not perfect. (I am not going to give the solution, but I want to note it before someone starts to use it blindly based on a quick google search.) For example it matches the input: 0000000000000000000000000000000009999999.00000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000 Also it doesn't let the "," to be used instead of ".", in some case you might want that that. |
|
|
|
If you find any connection between Hong Kong and Bitcoin crash, please tell us, because there is nothing in this article. Let's concentrate rather the real connection between Hong Kong and Bitcoin: http://redd.it/2i6h86Already 1000$ btc donations. |
|
|
|
|
I've just got an idea, feel free to implement (if it's not implemented already), but inform me about it.
Problem
We do not know what speculation method is the best. Mathemathical, economical, psychological? Who's speculation method is the best?
Solution
Let's set up a site.
You can register.
Send in your speculation.
If the deadline of your speculation is over, then other members can judge you (give you negative, positive karma, whatever).
On the main page speculations and the author reliability is listed.
Isn't a site like this would be great?
|
|
|
|
|
Could someone summarize for me why you guys have so much hope for this coin?
|
|
|
|
I'm the only one that put $1500-$5000 so far... I even think at prices higher than that, it is going to tough to have significant buy support on the exchanges. Obviously most people will be buying fractions of bitcoins at those prices (especially at prices higher than that). The average person would not even have enough disposable money to buy 1 btc...
there's over 7 billion people in the world, and 21 million bitcoins. If every person in the world wanted bitcoins, the average amount of bitcoins per person would be less then 0.003, that is, in 2140 when there are actual 21 million bitcoins (assuming none or lost) so if the price per bitcoin is even $5000 then 0.003 bitcoin would be $15, so on average every person would have $15 worth of bitcoin. This seems really insignificant to me, therefore i think bitcoin would be worth MUCH more, assuming bitcoin will be used by a majority of people. If you think many people are too poor to even have $15 or have internet, consider that over 6 billion people own a cellphone (source: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=number+of+cellphone+users) and facebook has 1 billion users. Therefore, it would not be outrageous to expect at the very least a billion bitcoin users in the not-so-distant future. (say, 2017-2018 or so). Let's assume by end 2018 there will be 1 billion bitcoin users each having about $250 worth of bitcoins on average(note, this does not mean they actually bought $250 worth of bitcoin, they could have been early adoptors), there are about 17 million bitcoins by then. So 0.017 bitcoin would be worth at least $250 so 1 bitcoin would be at least $14700 This could easily get very big. This logic could give a nice estimation, but that last 250$ multiplier just came from nowhere. |
|
|
|
This really is terrible news, and gives us all more reason to think that 2014 is the year of the end of bitcoin as confirmed by bad news sources. I'm sad to say that I forgot to post this in the bad news thread when we all found out about it at the end of October 2013. Help me inform current and potential bitcoin users of the dismal state of bitcoin in 2014 and beyond by posting this in the bad news thread, so that people can quickly see all of the worst news about bitcoin. Thank you for your help. Not you again. Who is paying you for constantly posting this kind of things? |
|
|
|
|
I didn't thought the price would go up this much. I was (and am) expecting the major growing in this week.
Over Christmas the network effect was happening (people tell each other about bitcoin from different social layers), but over those days nobody deals with business.
After that until silvester people don't work either.
There was January 1. It's day off, too. January 2 and 3 wasn't day off, but honestly nobody really work those days (but the price was just growing). January 4 and 5 are weekend (but the usual weekend crash didn't happenned, in fact the opposite).
And Today, January 6, Monday should be the day when the major growing should start. Companies are starting a new year and the innovation (bitcoin).
Any thoughts about my reasoning?
|
|
|
|
|
