Bitcoin Forum
March 23, 2017, 12:22:31 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.14.0  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
  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 ... 418 »
1  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: #BTC or #BTU? Gourl.io pays $500-600 per day as transaction fees .... on: March 22, 2017, 10:43:27 PM
Now while that sounds expensive, how much money are you forwarding every single day? What percentage of the amount of money that moves through your service becomes fees?

Also, why the hell do people keep pricing Bitcoin related things in non-Bitcoin units? It is both extremely confusing and extremely deceptive with the constantly fluctuating exchange rate.
2  Bitcoin / Armory / Re: I have a stuck transaction and tx broadcast timed out errors on: March 22, 2017, 10:31:03 PM
Can you post your armorylog.txt and dbLog.txt files which contain the times when the the "tx broadcast time out" errors occurred? I am investigating the issue and need the log files to confirm my hypothesis.
3  Bitcoin / Armory / Re: "the broadcast process failed unexpectedly" on: March 22, 2017, 10:29:52 PM
Those who have are experiencing this issue, can you please post your armorylog.txt and dbLog.txt files found in the Armory data folder? I am investigating what is causing this problem, and I will need to see both log files to confirm my current hypothesis.
4  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Transaction fees/how much does it cost to send bitcoin? on: March 22, 2017, 07:04:43 PM
This should help: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1195/how-to-calculate-transaction-size-before-sending

For the optimal transaction fee rate, you can use http://bitcoinfees.21.co/.
5  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: bitcoin needed to be a tranaction in a packet? on: March 22, 2017, 07:02:57 PM
A "packet on the blockchain" is called a block.

In order for a transaction to be included, it must be a valid transaction. This means it must consume outputs created by previous transactions, and those outputs must have some value associated with them. A Bitcoin transaction can include arbitrary data, however this is not advised as it harms the network.
6  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Post your SegWit questions here - open discussion - big week for Bitcoin! on: March 22, 2017, 07:00:35 PM
I feel like I woke up on a planet other than Earth today.

I'm not sure why it would be good if Core has "no leaders"? And why you're making this argument? What do the terms CEO and CTO mean to you? Who writes the bitcoin core roadmap? Would someone really invest $75 million in a corporation that has no leadership? Is this what happens to your thinking if you spend too much time doing open source development?

If bitcoin core really does not have leaders, someone needs to step up immediately.
Bitcoin Core is not a corporation, it does not have a CEO, it does not have a CTO, it does not have investors. Bitcoin Core is not a product of Blockstream. I don't see why you can't understand that Bitcoin Core is not a product of Blockstream and Blockstream's leadership does not have any say over what goes into Bitcoin Core.
7  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Connecting two local nodes in RegTest on: March 22, 2017, 05:27:50 PM
You should not have http:// in your connect option. Http is not part of the IP address, it is a protocol, and having that there will confuse bitcoind. You should just have
Code:
-connect=127.0.0.1:8330
8  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Connecting two local nodes in RegTest on: March 22, 2017, 03:45:38 PM
Because both nodes have their own chains, they will not be able to connect. You will need to delete the blockchain for one node.

You should also use -connect=<ip:port> (without the angle brackets) in your startup command for one node in order to connect it to the other.
9  Bitcoin / Technical Support / Re: Can a miner meddle with the transaction data in a block? on: March 22, 2017, 03:07:20 PM
Generally a miner cannot change the data within a transaction without completely invalidating it. Most transactions include digital signatures, and these signatures sign the entirety of the transaction, except for the signature itself. This means that if anything in the transaction is changed, the signature will not be valid and the transaction is thus invalid. If the miner changes the signature itself, the signature will no longer match the data it is supposed to sign so the transaction will also be invalid. These signatures is what prevents anyone else on the network from modifying your transactions and giving themselves the Bitcoin.

There are a few cases where this is possible, but those are for very advanced users and rarely implemented in wallets except for the most expert of users.

What miners do besides changing the nonce is changing the extranonce in the coinbase transaction of the block. The miner makes the coinbase transaction and has full control over it. They can also select different transactions or reorder transactions thus changing the merkle root of the block in order to find a hash that is valid.
10  Bitcoin / Technical Support / Re: Bitcoin transaction stuck on: March 22, 2017, 03:02:31 PM
Your transactions have been confirmed now.
11  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Files sharing on blockchain on: March 22, 2017, 02:59:15 PM
I have an application on network with database for files sharing , now i am thinking of to move that application on blockchain ,
Please don't. The blockchain as it is now is quite massive, and block space is very limited for money only transactions. If you include arbitrary data into the blockchain, you will be making the size of the blockchain even bigger, but bloated with useless data for the vast majority of users. You are forcing every full node operator to maintain your data for free even though it costs them additional disk space and network bandwidth for something that doesn't matter to them or the vast majority of users. You are costing everyone who uses Bitcoin the additional block space for your data which could instead have been used to include additional transactions to help deal with the large number of unconfirmed transactions. Please do not do this as it is completely detrimental to everyone who uses Bitcoin.

my question is how better security will be in blockchain for users files ,
The blockchain does not magically provide additional security to whoever uses it for whatever they are using it for. It still entirely depends on what data you are storing and how you are storing it in the blockchain. Putting something in the blockchain means that everyone will have access to that data, do you really want your users data to be shared with everyone?

if private keys lost then that's mean user lost his files ? then how i can make private keys more secure. Thanks
Private keys are completely unrelated to this. Arbitrary data does not require private keys.
12  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Post your SegWit questions here - open discussion - big week for Bitcoin! on: March 22, 2017, 02:51:35 PM
That would be Adam Back and Greg Maxwell.
Please explain in what way Adam Back has any say about anything that happens in Bitcoin Core. He is not a contributor, and AFAICT, never has been. He is not a member of the "team", he doesn't have commit privileges, he doesn't even participate in developer discussions on the IRC channels nor in the weekly developer meetings. So how, exactly, does Adam Back "lead" Bitcoin Core? If anything, I would say that the leader of Core is Wladimir as he is the release maintainer, usually the one who merges everything, chairs the weekly dev meetings, etc.

Hi achow, always respect your answers and insight. If a number of contributors not listed also help decide what goes into Core, how is it that the Hong Kong agreement resulted in a "proposal" by contributors? Does this mean that contributors may have an avenue for opening ideas but a higher layer still calls the shots?
Some contributors (not all, in fact, only 4 IIRC), were at the Hong Kong meeting and are the ones who made the proposal. Any individual can make a proposal, but that does not mean that everyone who works on the project frequently will think that it is a good idea and that everyone will agree to accept the proposal and implement it. There is no "higher up" but rather a group consensus decision.

Where is there documentation on the leadership/direction of "Core". I (think I) understand that decentralisation means just that there is no such thing, but to my uninitiated mind, it seems more a (non-deliberate) lack of transparency rather than decentralisation.
There isn't documentation really, and there really isn't a leadership structure. You can see who is considered a part of the "team" at https://bitcoincore.org/en/team/ but the team does not included everyone who contributes, just those who do so fairly frequently. The leadership consists of the three maintainers as they are the ones who merge everything (and Sipa who has commit access but isn't a maintainer) and I suppose you could say Wladimir is the leader as he is the release maintainer.

Who got to choose who became "Core"? Were they self-appointed?
Basically. People who contribute to Core frequently became noticed by other contributors, and over time, became associated with "Core" as a "Core dev". The only people who were "appointed" were the three maintainers, and only because they were basically doing the position that they were given for a while before they were actually given the titile. E.g Wladimir was setting out release schedules, release TODOs, release notes, and making releases themselves for a while before Gavin officially gave him the title. Jonasschnelli was submitting wallet and GUI pulls and reviewing other wallet and GUI pulls for a long time and he basically became the final say on wallet and GUI related stuff for them to be merged or not until Wladimir eventually made him the wallet and GUI maintainer. The same thing happened with MarcoFalke for him to become the QA maintainer.
13  Bitcoin / Armory / Re: I have a stuck transaction and tx broadcast timed out errors on: March 22, 2017, 02:36:10 PM
Your transaction is now confirmed. 0.96 will include RBF functionality so that it will be easier to replace transactions with one that pays a higher fee.
14  Bitcoin / Technical Support / Re: Bitcoin Core Installation Problems on: March 22, 2017, 03:44:39 AM
Check your permissions. Make sure that your user has write permissions to wherever you want to have the Bitcoin datadir.
15  Bitcoin / Armory / Re: BTU Hard Fork Inquiry on: March 22, 2017, 03:00:51 AM
Armory does not check block consensus rules. It will be able to work with alternate implementations that are based upon Core. AFAIK, Armory would work with BU, Classic, and XT even after they hard fork.
16  Bitcoin / Technical Support / Re: transaction doesn't show up on: March 22, 2017, 01:42:59 AM
doesn't show up in blockchain, even unconfirmed?
Of course it won't show up in the blockchain if it is unconfirmed. If you mean blockchain.info, then that means that the transaction fee paid by that transaction is too low, even for blockchain.info's node settings. As you can see from the images you posted, the transactions have a low fee warning from Electrum, so obviously the problem is that he paid too low of a transaction fee.

Read https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1802212.0 for what can be done about the transaction.
17  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Clarification on Bitcoin Developer Guide: Proof of Work on: March 21, 2017, 10:13:02 PM
I see what you're saying, but the problem is that AFAICT they were making the target value 2256-1 in the example and attempting to use 2255 in the second without stating it, which is incorrect when you're speaking about having a successful hash every other attempt.
No, they were saying that 2256-1 is the biggest possible number which a hash could be, indicating that the hash is a 256-bit hash. The target is 2255.

So is this just simply an error in their paragraph?
It's just a weird way of saying that the hash is a 256-bit hash.
18  Bitcoin / Technical Support / Re: How to get my privkeys from Core node incase of a fork? on: March 21, 2017, 09:57:55 PM
Since BU is based on Core, you can just copy your wallet.dat file from Core to a BU instance and be able to spend the Bitcoin from there.
19  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Clarification on Bitcoin Developer Guide: Proof of Work on: March 21, 2017, 09:56:26 PM
I don't quite understand this. Is there not a huge gap between 2255 and 2256-1? If you tried up to only two combinations (I'm assuming this is a hash value of 2256 and 2256-1) then how would you be able to produce a successful hash every other try?
It says on average, so given a big number of tries, half of them would be greater than 2255 and half would be less. I don't think saying "every other try" is the right wording for this.
20  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Post your SegWit questions here - open discussion - big week for Bitcoin! on: March 21, 2017, 06:14:25 PM
Who does, represent Bitcoin Core?
No one really represents Core. The closest you could get to "who represents Core" I suppose would be everyone listed on https://bitcoincore.org/en/team/ but any decision about what goes into Core is made by the entire group, plus a number of contributors not listed on that page.

What are Core, bound by?
Nothing really. There is no obligation for Core to do anything and nothing that requires them to do anything. There is a moral obligation for them to do "what is right for Bitcoin", but that is subjective.
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 ... 418 »
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!