Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 10:49:15 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 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 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 ... 458 »
1041  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Satoshi Dice -- Statistical Analysis on: April 21, 2013, 11:05:12 PM
We are either at or within a day or two of coming up on the one year anniversary of SatoshiDICE.  I see the forum post for it is April 24th, 2012 but the list of secrets goes back to April 17th, 2012.

When was the first real wager on SatoshiDICE placed?
1042  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: I will create a forked bitcoin chain on: April 21, 2013, 09:30:39 PM
Seriously dude?  Thats mondo easy.  take all the adjust values for unspent outputs and write them into the genesis block to the address they belong as coinbase txs.

I was interpreting wingding's statement as describing how coins issued prior to the fork would still be spendable on the inflatacoin side of the fork ... that they wouldn't be touched (i.e., "harmed").    But my assertion is that any spending of a "pure" coin issued pre-fork is a valid transaction on both sides thus any spending on the inflatacoin side is harmful to the holder of the coin.

A pure coin is one that has no taint from the coins issues after the fork, and thus would be a valid spend transaction on the Bitcoin blockchain side as well.

Now I suppose you could ensure that the inflatacoin client included in every spend transaction some taint in the INPUTs so that the transactions would only be valid on the inflatacoin side.  I still personally wouldn't use any coins with that client until they've been fully spent on the Bitcoin blockchain side, but after that I might milk the inflatacoin fork for whatever I could get from it, sure.
1043  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Question about double spends/transactions listed on blockchain on: April 21, 2013, 07:53:21 AM
I understand the transaction is listed as a double spend

That transaction had inputs that were also used in another transaction, so that's why there is the warning about the double spend attempt.    The transaction you linked has confirmations. It is valid, and is not the double spend.

As far as the double spend transactions that existed at one time ... blockchain.info doesn't retain those indefinitely so there's no telling today what had happened back then.
1044  Economy / Web Wallets / Re: Blockchain.info - Bitcoin Block explorer & Currency Statistics on: April 21, 2013, 07:51:59 AM
I'm wondering why Blockchain.info is having trouble with this transaction:

 - https://blockchain.info/tx/d3887aa543417c6934e7831407d017ec15b4b288a23cdd2977505a6ea1aff739

When I enabled "Advanced" I click on the (Spent), which is the URL:
 - https://blockchain.info/tx-index/66120873

but am given the response:  "Transaction not found"

But here is that transaction:
 - https://blockchain.info/tx/440a659b8298dcc0ac336e1c245472f6bcc48a90d978a746241c74b4368ae92e

So is this just an indexing error somewhere?
1045  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Does Bitcoin need a "stock split"? on: April 21, 2013, 07:25:06 AM
What do you think?

Your title doesn't match the body of your post.   A "split" is different from changing the "display format".

The display format most people want to see probably won't be cBTC, but instead mBTC.

Just like the Bitcoin-Qt/bitcoind client allows you to choose whichever display format you wish  (BTC, mBTC, uBTC), I expect each exchange to have a profile setting allowing you to choose which display format.


1046  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Probable Dead Bitcoins on: April 21, 2013, 07:04:28 AM
Also cold storage coins would also suffer the same fate. It's not suppose to be a perfect metric. It is giving an effective bound on deflation from money taken out of normal circulation

Nice round numbers likely aren't lost, so you probably want to have two different rules.  For example, a 7.23512343 coin that hasn't moved in years might be a lost coin, whereas a 250 BTC coin that hasn't moved over that same period of time is much more likely to be the address for a private key printed and stored in someone's fireproof safe.   Also, the value at the time it was sent will matter as well.  I would be more likely to understand that someone would have abandoned a wallet with 4.0 BTC in it in late 2011 due to having forgotten the exact encryption passphrase used, whereas today with a 4.0 BTC wallet it would be worth it to try a cracking utility to try and regain access to the wallet.

1047  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: Regulations regarding account sales/transfers (Bitfloor & Debt) USA/EU (SE) on: April 21, 2013, 06:23:30 AM
No information on wire transfers was announced.

International bank wire is coming.  They just don't have the details worked out yet.

Quote
International users, please be patient. We will have more details about wires soon.
- https://bitfloor.com

1048  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: Keeping track of trades on: April 21, 2013, 02:36:35 AM
Hello. I'm passionate about bitcoins but have no experience with somewhat frequent trading of stocks, currencies, or commodities. Can anyone recommend a good website, or application, or program, that I can use to track all of my bitcoin trades, expenses, profit, etc.  I have been using an excel spreadsheet I made but I'm sure there are better alternatives out there.

There is a personal finance manager that will read from the Bitcoin-Qt/bitcoind client, and others:
 - http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/3612/153
1049  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: I will create a forked bitcoin chain on: April 20, 2013, 07:15:10 PM
No I would never ever touch the earlier coins

How would you do that?

From another thread by winding:

looking at this guys older posts... people have been trying to explain to him how bitcoin works... looks like he is just refusing to understand it... and really want to get his early coins... so sad... (me is still sitting here very happy finding out about it in 2013, instead of 2016, or 2020)

And yet another thread by wingding:

The address is valid in both sides of the fork.  So let's say that somehow you trick me into spending my bitcoins that I received prior to the fork and pay using them to an address in your inflatacoin fork.  But then you can then use that exact same address on the Bitcoin blockchain side as well, broadcast my transaction there and receive the full value of the transaction there as well.

Participating on your side would be seen as the way to watch your bitcoins disappear.

Because there is no way to ensure that all transactions from the Bitcoin blockchain get into your inflatacoin fork, then the only time your chain becomes interesting to me is after my transaction confirms on the Bitcoin blockchain but where I've composed and sent a double spend of the UTXO used to your side of the fork, and then pay you with those funds which are now worthless on the Bitcoin blockchain.  That's a win / win for me!

1050  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-04-18 FoxBusiness - Bitcoin Buzz Draws Western Union, MoneyGram on: April 20, 2013, 04:56:21 PM
Western Union is roughly in the same position now as Blockbuster was in 10 years ago.

Exactly.  It isn't that blockbuster couldn't rent a movie at a profit, but that they had to get a lot of customers through the door so that little bit of profit per-movie multiplied many times was sufficient to pay the lease on the retail space, the staff, utilities, etc.

Western Union's model is tied to a two-step process by one company ...    Western Union receives money in one location and pays out that money (less fee and conversion costs) to someone in another location.    Bitcoin obliterates that model as there are now to independent actions that occur.  One party buys bitcoins in one location.   A different party sells bitcoins in some other location.     This means there is no reliance on a trusted party in the middle. 

This eliminates all the hawalders as well.   Well, not eliminates, it simply allows them to work independently.  They simply become bitcoin exchangers.  It is much easier for them to not need to deal with both sides of a money transfer.

Since money transfer is a business with an 8% to 20% vig (depending on where from and where to), there will be a lot of people who will welcome Bitcoin's arrival in this space.

1051  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Bitcoin versus Credit Cards, help Bitcoin compete on: April 20, 2013, 04:27:20 PM
Another solution would be to ask customers to "please enter your refund address" in case of a refund. Online wallets can play a role too.

I'm not going to comment on the "automatic" part of the refund process, but as far as the actual refund payment, you are correct that a new address needs to be obtained to process a refund.     This is a problem when the original purchase may have been made without an account and perhaps from an E-Wallet where the buyer doesn't have control of the address used to send payment.

This opens it up to where any party can request a refund on someone else's order in this scenario.  

Most E-commerce involves use of an authenticated account (e.g., authenticated username and password), so this isn't a problem for most merchants.   If selling anonymously, or without account authentication, then either a refund address should be provided by the customer at the time the order is placed (yuck) or the refund handling would need to be something otherwise appropriate.  For example, if a physical address was used for the order but a refund is requested then a letter with a refund verification code could be sent to the same address.  There are workable solutions that protect both the merchant and the customer for nearly every scenario.  

There is a payment protocol being built for the Bitcoin client that will further protect the person sending payment:
 - https://bitcoinfoundation.org/blog/?p=85

Case B: split payments
Use case: the European Union has enacted laws that customers may not be forced to pay >50% of an online purchase in advanced.

There are laws affecting specific payment methods (e.g, credit cards) that don't apply to other payment methods (cash).   If something like a payment sent upon notice from the delivery service were desired,  an escrow partner could facilitate that.
1052  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Does anyone remember the last time BTC difficulty retargeted Lower? on: April 20, 2013, 04:27:56 AM
Spreadsheet:

 - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmcTCtjBoRWUdHVRMHpqWUJValI1RlZiaEtCT1RrQmc
[oops, time to update it]
1053  Bitcoin / Technical Support / Re: Transaction sent 7 hours ago still unconfirmed? on: April 20, 2013, 04:11:01 AM
Any ideas?

Well, you didn't specificy which transaction, just the address. 

This transaction didn't have any fee paid
 - https://blockchain.info/tx/53997b4c90953afd79c0cda631e93a32a51e494350daa7c384390a7499942329

The reason it needed a fee is because of the details of the transaction.  If you look at the transaction in Advanced mode (scroll to bottom, click Advanced), then the transaction will show link to see the previous outputs.

Many of the INPUTs for your transaction either hand't confirmed yet at the time you made the transction or had just recently confirmed (e.g. 21 blocks prior).

That is the type of activity that would also come from someone trying to harm the bitcoin network, so the Bitcoin miners consider that to be a low priority transaction.

1054  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: QR Code Best Practice on: April 20, 2013, 03:49:40 AM
Which makes most sense in case anyone knows?

 - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0021#Examples
1055  Economy / Economics / Re: Buying big amount of BTCs- possible? on: April 20, 2013, 03:42:54 AM
I just wanted to know e.g what happens if I wanna buy like 100, 1000 or even 10 000. Just bitcoin market theory,

When you are trading on a market exchange like Mt. Gox, settlement occurs immediately.  In other words, every bitcoin that you buy is transferred to your exchange account immediately.   There is no delay on settlement, there is no cancellation, etc.   The bitcoins are credited and sitting in your account balance.

Now when you withdraw those, you are simply making a request to the exchange.  Your exchange account is a hosted (shared) E-Wallet account.  This means that you don't control the wallet.  The E-Wallet provider controls the wallet.    So the bitcoins you requested to be withdrawn are sent when the exchange/E-Wallet provider processes your withdrawal request.  That normally is relatively instant (e.g., in under a minute or a few minutes).   Because of security precautions, they may occasionally run out of coins in their hot wallet and may need to retrieve more funds from cold storage.   Think of this as withdrawing cash from a bank teller.  Smaller withdrawals can be handled normally, but sometimes large withdrawals require a delay as the funds need to be moved from more secure storage.    That can be a delay up to several hours or a little longer, depending on how the exchange/E-Wallet provider manages their cold wallet.

As far as your local wallet, (e.g., running Bitcoin-Qt/bitcoind), there is no limit as to how much it can hold.  

The exchanges all have daily withdrawal limits due to AML restrictions, so if you were to buy 10k BTC, that entire amount couldn't be withdrawn all at once.  At Mt. Gox, for instance, the limit for verified accounts is 1,000 BTC withdrawn per day.     A higher limit is available with an even higher level of AML verificatoin called "trusted" status:
 - https://support.mtgox.com/entries/20919111-AML-Account-Statuses

If your question has to do with what impact on the market do purchases of these size cause?  It depends on the exchange.   At Mt. Gox even you would probably want to stagger a 10K buy, or not, depending on market conditions and your preference as to how soon to complete the purchase.   Clark Moody site has a calculator to show "slippage", so you know how much it costs for a larger purchase.
 - http://bitcoin.clarkmoody.com  <-- Click "show calculators" and then enter the dollar amount you are looking to spend.
1056  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Jerusalem Post: Bitcoin is for terrorism on: April 20, 2013, 03:27:36 AM

LIGNET just did the same thing:

Bitcoin Virtual Money Opens Door for Terror Finance
 - http://tinyurl.com/d2urh4z
1057  Economy / Currency exchange / Re: Walmart Giftcards on: April 20, 2013, 03:14:17 AM
I'm looking to buy around $800+.

Are you in the U.S.?  If so, you can convert your bitcoins to Dwolla (e.g., Camp BX, Mt. Gox, FastCash4Bitcoins.com, #bitcoin-otc marketplace, etc.) and then use those funds at Lyoness to buy gift cards at 1:1 (i.e., an $800 Dwolla transfer gets you $800 of Walmart gift cards).

Purchase Gift Cards for Merchants in USA
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=156968.0
1058  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Solving the fast payments problem on: April 20, 2013, 12:49:21 AM
*) Naive implementation could open a potential denial of service, a rogue node sending over and over double spends of the same transaction. So you need to forward just one 2nd spend, not any of the following. The merchant needs to know that a double spend is in progress, not it's details, so races among 2nd, 3rd... spends are irrelevant. If any of the racing doublespends arrive at him, he fails the sale and holds the merchandise.0

Your node's memory pool has a transaction with inputs A and B.  Then received is another transaction with inputs A and C.  
So your node prefixes this second transaction with the first and relays this pair.

Then to another node the attacker has the transaction with inputs A and D.  
Your node will not relay that but other nodes that haven't learned of the transaction with A and C will.

At the same time the attacker relays a transaction with just an input D.

Your node learns about the transaction with D and relays it.

So, some nodes then have the transactions [A+B], [A+C], and [D]  but will never know about [A+D].    If a merchant relies on this node and accepts [D], that merchant loses if [A-D] gets included in a block.

So this doesn't really eliminate the risk, it just makes the attack a little more complex.  
1059  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Coinbase business model on: April 19, 2013, 10:04:56 PM
The exchange cannot be manipulated by false orders.

I'm not sure I entirely follow.   There are people who have discussed emptying their bank account so as to cause the Coinbase ACH to get a return code for NSF, after buying at a higher level and then later seeing the BTC/USD exchange rate at a fraction of that level. 

That essentially is a fake order, and Coinbase then is left holding the bag on the expensive bitcoins the buyer bailed on.  Additionally, Coinbase incurs a fee I believe for that NSF.

So they definitely take a risk with their current model. 
1060  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Is Bitcoin Safe For Business? on: April 19, 2013, 10:16:29 AM

That discussion is incomplete without double spending attacks, especially if payment is recognized on 0/unconfirmed.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 ... 458 »
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!