|
A fost odată, într-o pivniță răcoroasă, plină de mirosuri florale, un strigoi gingaș. Acesta era atât de beat, încât mama lui nu îl mai lăsa afară. Totuși, surorile sanatoriului sunt bețive de mult sânge de capră neagră și s-au aliat cu strigoiul. Alianța lor a antamat zmeul dizgrațios cu celule teroriste în pivnița minerului vecin. Conexiunile venale erau apăsătoare și începuseră să nuanțeze filonul emoțional.
Oare florile zigomorfe transcend gingășia prin gratiile ineluctabile ale întregului sanatoriu? Fie surorile înfierbântă spanac, fie strecoară cârnați de casă. Strigoiul visa uneori gagici, alteori pe el cu Ileana dezbrăcați de inhibiții ancestrale practicând arta străveche a acupuncturii.
Eeeei, acum începe metamorfoza monedelor de aur în povestea noastră despre strigoiul alcoolist. Comoara, dar și gagicuțele, se transformară în biți. Biții erau stocați criptat doar cu un algoritm rudimentar, încât era atât de simplu să facă cineva bruteforce și să fure intreaga cantitate de aur digital.
Strigoiul, pe timpul acela n-avea interes să învețe criptografie, mulțumindu-se sa taie
|
|
|
|
LKABSVERIGE y LUCANO, aquí NARYDU que viene reclamar lo que hace un tiempo fue mio y de todos.
He visto con total oprobio y desagrado la atención que la lógica se está llevando por sobre el corazón y lógica sin corazón no sirve. RECLAMO AQUÍ que todos vuelvan a aportar al foro Chamánico/Entráñico y que le presten el corazón a sus razones. Reclamo la presencia de arcaicos amigos como paraipan, majamalu, flix, vgo, voktar, tbcoin y porqué no nuestro osito de peluche siulynot, etc etc etc.
;-)
jajaja sin ti este foro no seria lo mismo Narydu  |
|
|
|
|
A fost odată, într-o pivniță răcoroasă, plină de mirosuri florale, un strigoi gingaș. Acesta era atât de beat, încât mama lui nu îl mai lăsa afară. Totuși, surorile sanatoriului sunt bețive de mult sânge de capră neagră și s-au aliat cu strigoiul. Alianța lor a antamat zmeul dizgrațios cu celule teroriste în pivnița minerului vecin. Conexiunile venale erau apăsătoare și începuseră să nuanțeze filonul emoțional.
Oare florile zigomorfe transcend gingășia prin gratiile ineluctabile ale întregului sanatoriu? Fie surorile înfierbântă spanac, fie strecoară cârnați de casă. Strigoiul visa uneori gagici, alteori pe el cu Ileana dezbrăcați de inhibiții ancestrale practicând arta străveche a acupuncturii.
Eeeei, acum începe metamorfoza monedelor de aur în povestea noastră despre strigoiul alcoolist. Comoara, dar și gagicuțele, se transformară în biți. Biții erau stocați criptat doar cu un algoritm rudimentar, încât era atât de simplu să facă cineva bruteforce și să fure intreaga cantitate de aur digital.
Strigoiul, pe
|
|
|
|
...
Kato, I've implemented Casascius cryptographic escrow into an easy to use web service that doesn't need any 3rd party intervention. So two people could transact between each other and handle escrows themselves without having to trust a 3rd party. I don't save the wallet addresses, payment codes, or private keys to the database. I don't want to highjack the thread just wanted to point that out.
Lol, how is that? Please enlighten us how your web service works. |
|
|
|
Y POR CIERTO YA ESTÁN AVISADOS LOS MODERADORES POR LA INTROMISIÓN EN MI INTIMIDAD
Si gracias por el aviso. Este hilo queda bloqueado a partir de ahora, y dado que ya has editado tus posts también se queda como futuro ejemplo para no seguir. Un saludo. |
|
|
|
Would you be so kind to comment on the solution I presented on MAX_BLOCK_SIZE issue?
Wery well, but first i need to find it... EDIT:I checked all of your posts in this topic and it is not there. Please point me in the right direction. Sorry about that, it was my previous post. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=221111.msg2377152#msg2377152 |
|
|
|
@ShadowOfHarbringer I say to you one more time, please control yourself.
We are back to the essential/contentwise discussion already (I'm done insulting piotr_n), so i don't understand what are you talking about. Glad to hear that, probably I missed your latest posts so I wasn't aware you guys have settled down. Would you be so kind to comment on the solution I presented on MAX_BLOCK_SIZE issue? |
|
|
|
@ShadowOfHarbringer I say to you one more time, please control yourself. We have an issue here and is quite obvious. Piotr_n is probably right thinking there is an agenda behind the actions of Gavin and his team, and I think the same thing, but let's not derail the topic here. I actually think the programmer team is doing this not to lose any control left over the network, like pushing changes with new updates, or vetting changes that aren't aligned with their view of the network. Here is an example of a pull request that has the potential to limit the spam transactions, so MAX_BLOCK_SIZE limit won't be reached before a couple of years. This consists of passing the control of the Bitcoin network to it's users resulting to be a controversial change in the dev team. and obviously was closed without a serious reason by Gregory Maxwell. Btw Gregory, please abstain yourself from commenting, you've done enough. Add user interface to set dust limit and filtered addresses - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2383Then Gavin and team start taking it seriously and implement a fixed minimum transaction in the code - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=197414According to Gavin himself writing code for Bitcoin, and submitting a pull request, should be quite easy - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4571.0 , but reality is quite different. I would recommend Gavin take small vacancy so he can recover his strength. |
|
|
|
... I've been derailed the last week by a death in the family, and still need to finish up some payment protocol work. Sorry for your loss Gavin. The most prudent course of action would be you leave development for a while and recover. Every point presented on this subject has already being addressed. Multiple times.
Point us in the right direction, don't be shy. @ShadowOfHarbringer please control your tone too, is obvious piotr_n wants to keep this thread on topic like you do. |
|
|
|
angry internet trolls like ShadowOfHarbringer and Gavin.
I'm doing well this month, so far I've been called an "Angry Internet Troll", a "coward", and a "nazi". Your "thick skin" should help you surpass the shock in no time. Meanwhile just address some points presented in this thread and don't feed other trolls, if it's not too much to ask. |
|
|
|
That's not John's signature.
Wait. Aren't you the guy who was inquiring earlier today how to steal 50 BTC from another one's account morally justifying it as "if he needs it, he should have used it"?
Yes. Yes, you were.
Also, mods: IPcheck escrow.ms and ssbtoday please. I think you'll find a strange overlap
+1 Here is the thread you opened and then silently locked https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225037 |
|
|
|
...
That has nothing to do with microtransactions, normal growth in "macrotransactions" will bump up against the limit in a year or three.
So why the rush? Why not let the merchants and users ask for change when the need arises? You have to understand where he's coming from. He and the Bitcoin Foundation are pushing Bitcoin as a system to do payments on the internet; the recent San Jose conference had the tagline "The future of payments" after all. It's a lot harder to convince people that investing time and money into implementing Bitcoin for payments is a good idea with a 1MB limit on transactions. Removing the blocksize limit entirely and making it something that miners decide solves that problem from that perspective: regardless of what the demand from transactions are at least one entity will always be able to meet that demand at a cost approaching the cost of bandwidth and servers. That's why Gavin likes to talk a lot about "free market forces" and "competition" when it comes to mining, and has said before he's happy to see the smallest 20% or so of miners and full-node operators get forced out of business by rising costs every year. From the perspective of someone who wants to accept Bitcoin payments on their online store letting the majority of miners decide what the blocksize is solves the uncertainty of how much transactions will cost. They connect directly to miners to send their transactions and don't care if Bitcoin is controlled by six people or six million. From the perspective of someone investing in Bitcoins because they want a decentralized store-of-value, AKA electronic gold... well they might see things differently. I still don't see it how they are going to convince the miners to drop the 1MB limit. Is there even a single mining pool that would not want to see 1MB limit at work, at least for awhile? When they see it, when they see the size of the incentive the limit gives them, it will make them even more motivated to never unlock it. Counting on the pool operators that they will just unconsciously start mining version 3 blocks, just because it will be a default setting in bitcoind version 0.8.4 onward... One would need to think that these people are either stupid or ignorant, which I don't think they are. I wish you good luck with the change Gavin although, like piotr_n says, people are either stupid or ignorant. You are the one who needs to focus on leading the development team according to the Bitcoin community, not the other way around. I would recommend having more than a rough consensus on this issue. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Address:
1GJmzymuJLmeqzhgbky91286GRhKZQFVYb
says so.. Unless there was a bug on bitaddress.org? where do I importprivkey in electrum?
Stephen already explained how can you import the private key a few posts earlier. There is no such thing as a bug on bitaddress. You could have found an address collision or simply mined the coins yourself in 2009, I find the later more credible. |
|
|
|
If Michael Fowlkes thinks this is an issue then is his problem, I didn't even found out Bitcoin was being regulated until now. From his words: Currently the main use for Bitcoins is to transfer money between users, and this is where the money laundering concerns come from. There have also been reports of websites selling illegal items such as drugs or guns that accept Bitcoins, making it virtually impossible for law enforcement to track these sales. How would you regulate something that you can't track? I like to think at it like regulating the spin of an electron while not knowing it's place precisely, only approximate the area where it may be found. |
|
|
|
...
That has nothing to do with microtransactions, normal growth in "macrotransactions" will bump up against the limit in a year or three.
So why the rush? Why not let the merchants and users ask for change when the need arises? |
|
|
|
1 week, had the "gold rush" fever too  |
|
|
|
I'm quoting this wonderful piece of text from the mailing list: James A. Donald wrote:
> It is not sufficient that everyone knows X. We also
> need everyone to know that everyone knows X, and that
> everyone knows that everyone knows that everyone knows X
> - which, as in the Byzantine Generals problem, is the
> classic hard problem of distributed data processing.
The proof-of-work chain is a solution to the Byzantine Generals' Problem. I'll
try to rephrase it in that context.
A number of Byzantine Generals each have a computer and want to attack the
King's wi-fi by brute forcing the password, which they've learned is a certain
number of characters in length. Once they stimulate the network to generate a
packet, they must crack the password within a limited time to break in and
erase the logs, otherwise they will be discovered and get in trouble. They
only have enough CPU power to crack it fast enough if a majority of them attack
at the same time.
They don't particularly care when the attack will be, just that they all agree.
It has been decided that anyone who feels like it will announce a time, and
whatever time is heard first will be the official attack time. The problem is
that the network is not instantaneous, and if two generals announce different
attack times at close to the same time, some may hear one first and others hear
the other first.
They use a proof-of-work chain to solve the problem. Once each general
receives whatever attack time he hears first, he sets his computer to solve an
extremely difficult proof-of-work problem that includes the attack time in its
hash. The proof-of-work is so difficult, it's expected to take 10 minutes of
them all working at once before one of them finds a solution. Once one of the
generals finds a proof-of-work, he broadcasts it to the network, and everyone
changes their current proof-of-work computation to include that proof-of-work
in the hash they're working on. If anyone was working on a different attack
time, they switch to this one, because its proof-of-work chain is now longer.
After two hours, one attack time should be hashed by a chain of 12
proofs-of-work. Every general, just by verifying the difficulty of the
proof-of-work chain, can estimate how much parallel CPU power per hour was
expended on it and see that it must have required the majority of the computers
to produce that much proof-of-work in the allotted time. They had to all have
seen it because the proof-of-work is proof that they worked on it. If the CPU
power exhibited by the proof-of-work chain is sufficient to crack the password,
they can safely attack at the agreed time.
The proof-of-work chain is how all the synchronisation, distributed database
and global view problems you've asked about are solved.
Double quoting Satoshi for posterity. |
|
|
|
...
No, una CPU no es un ASIC, todo lo contrario, la CPU es un procesador de próposito general que ejecuta código, el ASIC implementa el código directamente sobre el hardware, de esa forma se gana rendimiento pero se pierde versatilidad.
Creo que estas confundiendo el ASIC con el SoC. Habria mas puntos por debatir en tu post pero vamos a dejarlo, no quiero levantar polemica. El que estas confundido eres tu, Gilito tiene razón, una CPU es un procesador de propósitos generales, tiene un conjunto limitado de funciones que se usan para crear infinidad programas complejos, en cambio un ASIC como lo dice su nombre Application-specific integrated circuit, esta hecho para hacer una y solo una tarea, no se lo puede programar externamente por lo que su uso es limitado a la tarea para la que fue diseñado. Mal ejemplo, lo siento, espero haber estado en lo cierto con la GPU. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
