Bitcoin Forum
November 18, 2017, 01:32:17 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
  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 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 ... 245 »
401  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [VNL] Vanillacoin, a quiet word of warning. on: January 14, 2015, 08:00:13 PM
FWIW, I politely reported the copyright violation (the code being a copy of Bitcoin Core run through an auto-formatter with all the attribution removed) as an issue on the github for the project and john-connor accused me of stalking him and then hid the issue tracker on that github from public view. :-/

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised as it's consistent with the rest of the concerns that resulted in creating this thread-- that there is some ongoing effort to keep that work out of the sunlight.

copyright violation? enlighthen me please since Bitcoin Core is an open source as far as i know
Bitcoin Core is copyrighted open source, as most open source software is.
If you violate the license terms, you can never copy it again, unless the copyright holders give you a new license.

who is the copyright holder then?Sathoshi Nagamoto?
Each individual contributor holds copyright to his contribution.
That means any of us can DMCA or sue for copyright infringement, and that someone who has infringed on the license needs to get permission from each and every one of us, before they can distribute/copy Bitcoin Core ever again (even unmodified).
(and yes, you're right that they will have a difficult time getting permission from Satoshi...)
402  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 5.0.0: GBT+Stratum, RPC, Mac/Linux/Win64, BlackArrow Prospero, KnC Nep. on: January 14, 2015, 05:03:47 PM
How can you underclock the Monarch?
--set bitforce:_cmd1=F?? --set bitforce:_cmd1=V?X

Are those in the 5.0.0 release?
They go back all the way to 4.0.0 Smiley
403  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [VNL] Vanillacoin, a quiet word of warning. on: January 14, 2015, 04:43:35 PM
FWIW, I politely reported the copyright violation (the code being a copy of Bitcoin Core run through an auto-formatter with all the attribution removed) as an issue on the github for the project and john-connor accused me of stalking him and then hid the issue tracker on that github from public view. :-/

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised as it's consistent with the rest of the concerns that resulted in creating this thread-- that there is some ongoing effort to keep that work out of the sunlight.

copyright violation? enlighthen me please since Bitcoin Core is an open source as far as i know
Bitcoin Core is copyrighted open source, as most open source software is.
If you violate the license terms, you can never copy it again, unless the copyright holders give you a new license.
404  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Users of Bitcoin Core on Linux must not upgrade to the latest version of OpenSSL on: January 13, 2015, 10:55:53 PM
so i have openssl 1.0.1f but everything seems up to date with the blockchain w/o any obvious problems.  any need to reindex?
If you have 0.9.4 or 0.10.0rc3, and your blockchain isn't stuck already, you don't need to reindex.
If you're not on the latest versions, then if your blockchain isn't stuck, it will be eventually.
405  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Users of Bitcoin Core on Linux must not upgrade to the latest version of OpenSSL on: January 13, 2015, 07:47:35 PM
Sorry, but what is the actually BC version atm?
0.9.4 is current stable.
0.10.0rc3 is release candidate.
406  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Users of Bitcoin Core on Linux must not upgrade to the latest version of OpenSSL on: January 12, 2015, 04:51:32 PM
Gentoo 0.8.6-r1 and 0.9.3-r1 have the patch to workaround the issue.

LibreSSL isn't reinventing the wheel, but rather repairing a broken wheel. As LibreSSL grows more mature, and since it's a drop-in replacement for OpenSSL, it will with time deprecate OpenSSL and I'm sure the Bitcoin devs are wise enough to make the switch at some point.
Unless LibreSSL is guaranteeing bug-for-bug compatibility with old OpenSSL, it cannot safely be used with Bitcoin.
That means it MUST make sure all bugs in OpenSSL 1.0.1j are still bugs in LibreSSL.
As far as I know, that is not a goal of either OpenSSL nor LibreSSL, and is exactly why the new version of OpenSSL breaks Bitcoin by fixing a bug.
407  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 5.0.0: GBT+Stratum, RPC, Mac/Linux/Win64, BlackArrow Prospero, KnC Nep. on: January 08, 2015, 07:58:05 PM
What would be the right grammar to add both, "stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com/#xnsub#skipcbcheck"?

Luke-Jr, it would be very useful if you would include a section in README explaining all #xxx pool parameters and the correct usage of them (syntax). Currently these options/features are only mentioned in NEWS...
I agree it would be useful. Perhaps some non-coder can contribute these kind of changes? Wink
408  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 5.0.0: GBT+Stratum, RPC, Mac/Linux/Win64, BlackArrow Prospero, KnC Nep. on: January 08, 2015, 07:09:51 PM
What would be the right grammar to add both, "stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com/#xnsub#skipcbcheck"?
Yes
409  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 5.0.0: GBT+Stratum, RPC, Mac/Linux/Win64, BlackArrow Prospero, KnC Nep. on: January 04, 2015, 08:01:37 AM
How can you underclock the Monarch?
--set bitforce:_cmd1=F??

The first "?" is a frequency index, from 1 to F (hexadecimal).
Due to dynamic clocking in the MCU, there are no set frequency numbers.
The second "?" is either "X" for normal speed, or "D" for double speed.

You can also use --set bitforce:_cmd1=V?X to control voltage.
In this case, the "?" is one of:
  • 0 = 0.54 V
  • 1 = 0.55 V
  • 2 = 0.56 V
  • 3 = 0.58 V
  • 4 = 0.6 V
  • 5 = 0.62 V
  • 6 = 0.63 V
  • 7 = 0.643 V
  • 8 = 0.65 V
  • 9 = 0.662 V
  • A = 0.67 V
  • B = 0.68 V
  • C = 0.7 V
  • D = 0.72 V
  • E = 0.73 V
  • F = 0.75 V
410  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 5.0.0: GBT+Stratum, RPC, Mac/Linux/Win64, BlackArrow Prospero, KnC Nep. on: December 30, 2014, 03:05:51 PM
the problem is if BFG does not detect "shares" being accepted it throws up an idle error after 60 seconds.
No, it doesn't. That error means the device has stopped responding entirely.
411  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Bitnodes crawlers from 54.x.x.x (Amazon EC2 instances) on: December 30, 2014, 10:42:08 AM
I noticed those as well. They make me wonder whether Bitcoin Core should try to identify and drop useless peers when getting close to the connection limit.
I have all 8 connected to my testing node, what makes them useless?
They're worse than useless - maintaining a persistent connection to every node is a serious privacy issue.
Each node can also only have a limited number of connections, each of which consume resources.
412  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: When are Sidechains going Live? And the Fork ... ? on: December 28, 2014, 11:56:32 PM
I think the world is not ready for sidechains yet, most people still didn't even understand bitcoin itself. No fork is currently proposed because there's a lot to do making bitcoin user-friendly and more used.

The reference client is not ment to be user friendly. Remember, this is a protocol, not a mom and pop application. It is being developed for developers in my point of view.
I am not talking about the reference client.
Or any client.
Or any piece of software.
I am talking about the whole idea of bitcoin and protocol, it needs to be improved/polish in ways that facilitate understanding and adoption, and sidechains are the opposite of that.
Most people will never understand the protocol. Nor do they need to, in order to use/adopt Bitcoin.
Sidechains are practically necessary to make most other changes.
413  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: When are Sidechains going Live? And the Fork ... ? on: December 28, 2014, 07:07:03 PM
Once the SPV peg test sidechain is mature/stable/well-tested to everyone's satisfaction, at that point there can be a softfork to make it the "main" blockchain (at which point the federated peg becomes unnecessary and goes away).

Would you share some technical goals for that new main candidate?
As gmaxwell said, it's far too premature to be talking about any concrete plans for this.
414  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 5.0.0: GBT+Stratum, RPC, Mac/Linux/Win64, BlackArrow Prospero, KnC Nep. on: December 28, 2014, 07:05:21 PM
From README:
Quote
415  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: Backslash - the easiest way to send and receive Bitcoin on: December 27, 2014, 02:55:09 AM
Hmm, someone just sent me some µBTC via Backslash, but it wants me to sign up to get them... :/
How can I retrieve them without signing up? Wink
416  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: Backslash - the easiest way to send and receive Bitcoin on: December 27, 2014, 12:31:52 AM
My question is: you say you can send bitcoins to "anyone" - but does that include being able to send bitcoins to bitcoin users? That is, to an explicit bitcoin address and/or via the payment protocol, so the recipient isn't forced to sign up for Backslash?

If not, this is just an ewallet that forces others to use it rather than Bitcoin itself.

It does, I withdrew to my Bitcoin wallet. It was processed instantly.
That's withdrawing, not sending. I suppose you could withdraw to someone else's address, but some services have rules against that.

I sent to an address. I said withdrawing as it was effectively that. It detected it was a blockchain transfer and mentioned the 0.1mBTC transaction fee.
Ah, nice.
417  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: When are Sidechains going Live? And the Fork ... ? on: December 27, 2014, 12:16:55 AM
I dont see sidechains working out. Its one of those projects which look exciting but have too many issues to work out to be worthwhile. There is also not enough incentive for devs to spend time on it.
That's why we started a company, so we can work full time on Bitcoin.
418  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: Backslash - the easiest way to send and receive Bitcoin on: December 27, 2014, 12:16:02 AM
My question is: you say you can send bitcoins to "anyone" - but does that include being able to send bitcoins to bitcoin users? That is, to an explicit bitcoin address and/or via the payment protocol, so the recipient isn't forced to sign up for Backslash?

If not, this is just an ewallet that forces others to use it rather than Bitcoin itself.

It does, I withdrew to my Bitcoin wallet. It was processed instantly.
That's withdrawing, not sending. I suppose you could withdraw to someone else's address, but some services have rules against that.
419  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: Backslash - the easiest way to send and receive Bitcoin on: December 26, 2014, 10:45:47 PM
Review of terms of service (I only skimmed, as I don't intend to sign up regardless; also, IANAL and TINLA): Better than ChangeTip (you retain your civil rights, and I don't see any prohibition of RE).

BTW, where do you have MSB licensing?
420  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: Backslash - the easiest way to send and receive Bitcoin on: December 26, 2014, 10:36:36 PM
My question is: you say you can send bitcoins to "anyone" - but does that include being able to send bitcoins to bitcoin users? That is, to an explicit bitcoin address and/or via the payment protocol, so the recipient isn't forced to sign up for Backslash?

If not, this is just an ewallet that forces others to use it rather than Bitcoin itself.
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 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 ... 245 »
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!