Bitcoin Forum
May 11, 2024, 12:27:57 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  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 »
281  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Bitcoin x86 for Windows on: July 26, 2010, 02:15:21 PM
Thanks for thinking about those still on the 32bit chips  Grin
282  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Bitcoin x64 for Windows on: July 26, 2010, 02:06:53 PM
OK, now for some absolutely incredible performance.

Credit to tcatm for the caching part of the SHA context - this offers absolutely brilliant performance. Additionally, the Intel compiler really comes into its own here as its parallelisation abilities give a massive performance boost over Visual Studio.

Performance: 4700khash/s on 4 cores, I think that speaks for itself.

I've included both the VS and Intel build, but there's really no comparison, the Intel build craps all over VS.

Grab SHA state caching Bitcoin here
Wow, this is the biggest jump I've ever seen. Nearly a 250% increase in speed from the stock version, amazing.  Now let's see how stable it is  Smiley

283  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Bitcoin x64 for Windows on: July 26, 2010, 05:22:06 AM
OK, so given that the SHA256 is now 100% assembler code, I figured I might as well just build it entirely using Visual Studio, so I did just that and performance was exactly the same.

So, for those of you who have found the VS builds to be more stable, click here to get it
Yeah, runs every bit as fast as the Intel tweaked ones from what I could tell in testing, plus the program is half the size compiled.  Smiley
284  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: A lucrative attack on bitcoin? on: July 25, 2010, 09:20:17 PM
The point being, listing out a bunch of AND AND AND's proves nothing.  You're quite right that it has to be economical, we just simply disagree that something like this isn't potentially extremely economical.  The biggest hurdle is likely that bitcoin is just too small for a serious botnet guy to make any money off of and do anything with.  As it grows the profit potential only grows larger.

The ANDS aren't meant to prove anything. They are milestones for a plan that give a probable difficulty in reach each milestone in anecdotal form. Meaning, if my goal was to buy up the world's gold supply. The plan would be as simple as step 1, buy all the gold, step 2, I have all the gold. But we know there would be a lot of steps in between to achieve that goal.

This topic had a 5 step plan for the goal on how to profit from a Bit Coin attack using a Bot Network and filling in the in-between stuff just further documents the difficulty in it, that's all.  Wink

But I know what you mean and I agree, the botnet guys are making enough money not to really care about a Bit Coin scam at the moment.
285  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Stealing Coins on: July 25, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
You would still have to sign it with public key 654321.  You need to find a collision using a public key for which you know the private key.

When you claim a Bitcoin Address transaction, you give your public key that matches the hash, then you must sign it with that key.

Red's point is that it's easy to quickly generate insecure public keys which you could break and find the private key after you find a collision.

He points out that if the public key was required to be a secure one, one which must have required significant work to find the prime numbers, that would increase the strength above that of the hash function alone.  Someone trying to brute force would have to take time generating a key for each attempt.

Yeah, I thought the private key had to be in the mix somewhere. It kind of adds another randomness though, you have to find the hash that collides with another public key and at the same time, the private key has to be weak enough to break. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it introduces 2 variables into the reverse collision finding.

Basically, one would build a rainbow table of weak private keys and then have to compare those to public hashes and then have to hope that someone out there has a hash that happens to be a part of that attack. Not impossible of course, but how feasible even if computers were 100 times faster in 10 years?

[edit] ok, re-read what you wrote, the public key is generated from the private key, not independently. So just finding a weak public key is the issue.
286  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Stealing Coins on: July 25, 2010, 07:44:02 PM
Satoshi pointed out that my scenario still required the hash function to be broken. That is true, but I was surprised to learn how successful some have been with that. MD4 and MD5 are obvious examples. But work is well underway at colliding SHA-1 and siblings like SHA-256.
What they often don't mention though is *collision generating* still takes a lot of CPU time.

If I figure out that Public Key 123456 generates Hash ABCD
and
Public Key 654321 also generates Hash ABCD
I'm still left without the Private Key.

But from what you are saying, all I need is Public Key 654321 and I can spend coin pretending to be Public Key 123456.
287  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Stealing Coins on: July 25, 2010, 07:34:42 PM
Very nice. *another reason why I love open source*

As I understand it then, and please correct me if I'm wrong

Since the hash of the public key is smaller than the actual public key itself, one need only find a collision that matches the hash and when that collision is found you'll know the public/private key combo. Then you simply spend coin using the known ones and the other clients will think it's a valid transfer because the clients are only concerned that your hash matches the hash of the victim and the transaction is recorded for all time.

Currently the hash is 35 characters long, alpha-numeric
26 (upper case) +26 (lower case) +10 (numbers) = 62 possible per character
So we have 541,638,008,296,341,754,635,824,011,376,225,346,986,572,413,939,634,062,667,808,768 possible combinations.

So I think we have about half of much work to do compared to going brute force against the main private/public key. Never hurts to plan for the future  Wink
288  Economy / Trading Discussion / Re: Exchange Market Report 25 July on: July 25, 2010, 07:05:11 PM
I like it too, it's straight to the point and doesn't blame/assume things about the market. It just presents what is there, the reader can decide for him/her self how good/bad things are going.  Smiley
289  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Stealing Coins on: July 25, 2010, 06:15:05 PM
I think I know what he means, but I was certain that the odds of doing it a bit too random to make an attack out of it.
290  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Sent some coins on: July 25, 2010, 05:58:53 PM
I just sent 0.01 to 14 different IPs, I tried all of them, but some were not responding. Also I just noticed that the send coin dialog only works with IP address, not host names.
Also I got one reply on the next block cycle!


Oh I was wondering about that, I actually sent the 0.01 back, hehe.
291  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Stealing Coins on: July 25, 2010, 05:19:29 PM
It's open source software, better to discuss it now than try to keep it a secret for someone else to discover and they may not be willing to share any details.
292  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Nenolod, the guy that wants to prove Bitcoin doesn't work. on: July 25, 2010, 02:52:25 AM
The network adjusts difficulty every 2016 blocks to get to 6 blocks/hour average, basically factor = (14 * 24 * 60 * 60) / (actual # of seconds taken for the last 2016 blocks); factor = max(0.25, factor);  factor = min(4, factor); new_difficulty = old_diffculty * factor
And, as I said, the total hash rate after he supposedly stopped his nodes went UP.
If things continue like this, on the next iteration we'll end up with a difficulty increase to ~ 230.
Which means then at 1000khash/s you'll generate a block every ~11d10h on average, which comes out to ~ 0.1825BTC/h
That's what I was expecting too, but I was using napkin math, glad you took the time to work out the real numbers. Either someone has stopped the search for SETI or Gene Finding to start making Bit Coins or a lot of people have installed the client on their PC and have it churning 24/7 to mine coins. I guess since all the downloads come from sourceforge, I wonder how many downloads have taken place in the last few months? I know I've downloaded the client hundreds of times now to install it  Grin
293  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Bitcoin x64 for Windows on: July 25, 2010, 12:54:44 AM
On my desktop, I have a dual boot between Ubuntu and Windows 7. The SSE2 build brings Windows 7 speeds up to around the same as the Ubuntu build.
OK.  Could someone please explain the why of that, in terms that a non-programmer can understand?  Why is the stock Windows build slower than the stock Ubuntu build?
Optimizations mainly. When the program is being compiled on Windows, certainly optimizations make the program more efficient.

On Linux, we have both 32bit and 64bit builds to take advantage of the 64bit arch of the system. On windows, there was only a 32bit build.
294  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Nenolod, the guy that wants to prove Bitcoin doesn't work. on: July 25, 2010, 12:48:53 AM

We're generating over 9 blocks an hour, so it's going to slow down. Right?

The blocks per hour try to remain steady, the difficulty just goes down. Basically he's saying "I made it hard for everyone because my machine(s) were winning every time", now that the machines are shut off, "you all should be winning the blocks everytime".

So the rate remains constant, but everyone should start generating more blocks (perhaps a few per day instead of 1 every 2 weeks like before).
295  Economy / Marketplace / Re: Use your BTC to buy any item on E-bay under $33.11 USD **sold** on: July 25, 2010, 12:32:21 AM
Curious what the exchange rate was :-)
Whatever the market was that day, should be able to look up the history since he has a nice graph on it now. https://www.bitcoinmarket.com/
296  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Nenolod, the guy that wants to prove Bitcoin doesn't work. on: July 24, 2010, 08:44:18 PM
I've actually been wonder quite a bit about the new Bitcoin Lords.  I know there are stats on how many coins were generated and what accounts they are in... But are there any statistics on
1) How rich is rich in Bitcoins? A sort of Forbes 400 kind of thing.
2) how many Real Life node operators are there?
3) now many nodes are running full time and intermittently. Graphed over time kind of thing
Given that 70,000 blocks = roughly 3.5 million bit coins. Having 85k would give him about 2.4% of the market. I know a lot of the market exchange sites for Bit Coin have at least that or more BTC for the trade volume. I would be curious myself  Grin
297  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Hard disk usage on: July 24, 2010, 08:20:16 PM
Even with having most of the blocks the hard drive usage seems a little inefficient.

I've had my client offline for several days and just started it. It already had over 69,000 blocks and yet the hard drive was grinding for 2+ minutes solid before the counter started going up. (I even installed version 0.3.2.5 hoping the cached database stuff Satoshi added would help.)

Clearly the initial startup is doing some sort of block (re)verification for all blocks that is causing some synchronous reads and/or writes.
Yes, and the next release will speed that many times over, I've tested both the Windows and Linux client, major speed increase on block updates in them.
298  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Nenolod, the guy that wants to prove Bitcoin doesn't work. on: July 24, 2010, 07:58:02 PM
Once block 70560 comes around, we will know if the other part (Nenolod's) plans were a lie as well.

Could you decode your meaning for me? I'm a little slow.
Your not slow, it's just cryptic talk really. Basically, people are worried he is going to mess with the market. Mainly, they thought he had a 1,000 CPU farm churning out Bit Coins like he was printing money. Which going by his own words, he was leading everyone to believe. At the same time though, many stories about Bit Coin were spreading across the Internet, so traffic to the site increased, many people downloaded the client and set their PC to start "generating coin" so to speak.

Since Bit Coin regulates coin production based on CPU power, all these new people running the client were adding more CPU power to the pool. Thus, the difficulty of each block generation (50 BTC) in this case started to increase rapidly. He used this situation to offer up no proof of nothing more than he had a server farm out there somewhere churning Bit Coins. At the same time, everyone is hoping on board Bit Coin and naturally increasing the difficulty of block generation.

So, people would cross correlate that since he said he had a server farm making coins and the difficulty had jumped up so rapidly, they assumed he was telling the truth.

The breakdown though is given the short amount of time he claimed to have generated 85K of Bit Coin went against of the logic of just how many BTC can actually be generated. According to his own tweets, he was producing 85K in under a few days. By logic, he can't because it would take an 11 day straight coin generating server farm to do this, plus no one else would be able to generate any coin. I was generating plenty during the time he claims to have his server farm up and running, so on that front he was lying I believe.

He now claims that he shut down that server farm long ago and that he has all he needs. Fair enough, if that's true, then by block 70,560 the difficulty of BTC coin generation will take a nose dive.

On another front, he mentions how much he spent using cloud computing to generate all the BTC. I use cloud computing myself and I know how much it cost to use that much CPU power and it's certainly not the few hundred dollars he claims. So, again, I believe he was caught in another lie.

And finally the third reason, and one I don't ever mention, is because some members at this forum have way more CPU resources than he claim to have and they know what the generation rates for them was before and after his claims. His CPU power doesn't pan out against real world experience or else he had the worlds slowest 1,000 core setup.

Quote
I don't think Nenolod has any intention of screwing with or manipulating bitcoin values in the future. At least not given his obviously announced plans. On the contrary, he is literally "banking" on Bitcoins becoming successful.

I'm assuming that he is just going to use bitcoins as backing for his own inter-MMO exchange currency. I'm not an MMO player so excuse my lame examples, but suppose someone was really good at cybersex in say secondlife, but they wanted to trade their services for say a magical sword in world of warcraft. It sounds like Nenolod wants to build an exchange for that. But how do you value orgasms vs magical swords? If you do it in USD, you open yourself to a world of needless regulatory pain. If you do it in Nenocoins, no one will bat an eye.

However, if he backs his Nenocoins with Bitcoins, he gets a bonus selling point in that Nenocoins can be converted to USD or fiat currencies, without him suffering any government grief.

It really is a clever idea! Kudos!

Why would he go through all the grief he did of running 1,000 servers?  I'm sure he started the gag as a hack. But after contemplating it for a couple of days he realized, Duh!  Bitcoins have designed in steady deflation!

Say he gathered 60,000 bitcoins. That represents about $300.00 worth of market cap (last I checked). If his claims are true, he was able to collect them at a discount for only $100.00. In addition, he could quietly gather all of them without competing against himself by driving up Bitcoin prices.

So now he is done. For $100.00 he has all the Bitcoins he'll ever need. If Bitcoins become successful, he no longer has to deal with the bitcoin market again. If Bitcoins fail, he has lost minimal value for a development task the size he is working on. (about 2 hours of paid programmer time).

That was what I meant about early adopter "Bitcoin Lord".

I have to disagree, but only for one reason. He wanted a large amount of BTC and the easiest way was to take advantage of the situation when Bit Coin had a lot of press and he knew the difficulty of all these new people joining would increase and thus make it much harder to generate BTC. Using this, he puts out a claim that he has a massive server farm running somewhere and how he's out to show that BTC can be bought out with enough money. At first, it seems logical to people, so they feel the current BTC they have will probably be worthless. He buys up all the BTC he can at fire sale prices and then ends up with a lot of BTC when it's done.

What he does with it, I'll leave that to him. But to go through all of that for only 85K BTC is really just a drop in bucket compared to how much some people have right now.

Only he knows the truth, but in the end after some time, we will at least know if his methods were false or not. What he does with his real or made up amounts of BTC is his own business and I'm not concerned about that. I'm only concerned when I see someone trying to use scare tactics to take advantage of a market. I compare it to someone claiming they have invented a device that can turn water into gold for only $9.99, the gold market plummets, someone buys all the gold at cheap prices, then later people realize that the original water to gold machine was just a lie. The price goes back up, someone gets very rich  Grin
299  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: There might be another bitcoin bubble.... on: July 24, 2010, 05:43:40 PM
I think the biggest problem for the value of bitcoin right now is paypal fees. To buy / exchange them if you are getting dinged to gain them, unless you are keeping the bc's and reusing them, everyone is getting dinged with fees.
The way around it is to choose the "gift" option, then if the other party has a paypal account there is no fee.

Unless the other party, i.e. me, is not in the US/UK.  Undecided
They limit to just the top half of the world? That's lame of them, go figure.  Sad
300  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Nenolod, the guy that wants to prove Bitcoin doesn't work. on: July 24, 2010, 05:24:21 PM
Once block 70560 comes around, we will know if the other part (Nenolod's) plans were a lie as well.
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 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!