At this point I think the only remaining hope is for some third party creating a side-chain to create this garbage there and then pump it so that the gamblers actually bother going there. That way we can "transfer the cancer" out of Bitcoin and let it die there instead of it metastasizing here.
The "pumping" part is important...
In that case, we should encourage Blockstream to massively promote their Liquid network. After all, the feature is already exist. To me, this was acceptable until it reached thousands of OP_RETURN transactions per block. See Mempool Goggles. The larger spam transactions are now replaced by many more small transactions. It's still spam and takes up block space that could have been used by real Bitcoin users. you can't have it both ways. you either accept and support OP_RETURN and allowing people to store data on the blockchain or you say "No, I don't agree with OP_RETURN at all. Bitcoin was not meant for people to think of as any type of data storage." period the end. Why not? People opinion isn't limited to yes or no. That's why Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree or 1 to 5) exist. the logic that you are going to introduce a special op code to store data so they won't abuse UTXOs is ridiculous in my opinion. but that's what we did and that's where we are. the end results of that...
The other choice is letting total UTXO explode, which leads to higher RAM requirement or faster disk speed to run full node. |
|
|
|
|
It's very drastic action, when we could just make Ordinals TX (or rather OP_FALSE OP_IF usage) become non-standard which force spammer to either give up or ask miner to add their TX manually at high cost. And IMO hard fork should be used for far more important upgrade/change, rather than only to make Ordinals TX invalid.
|
|
|
|
I see you fixed the link. Anyway, i just tested it, but it seems your website isn't working properly.  For reference, i tried checking address bc1qxhmdufsvnuaaaer4ynz88fspdsxq2h9e9cetdj which supposed belong to Foundry USA mining pool. |
|
|
|
|
First of all, nobody can give solid feedback when your tool got filtered by this forum. And since each exchange may use different way to determine whether certain coin is "tainted" not, people would question how useful is your tool.
|
|
|
|
I am using the portable version, not sure why it does not provide me with cmdline option - only gives a console through the GUI.
If you don't specify any argument, it'll open the GUI by default. But if you run electrum-4.5.4-portable.exe --help on cmd, it should show basic information about using CLI version. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin Client Software and Version Number: Bitcoin Core 27.0
Operating System: Windows 11 64-bit
System Hardware Specs: 3.60 GHz AMD Ryzen 5 3600 6-Core Processor with 16 GB RAM and 60 GB free SSD drive space.
Description of Problem:
1. How to enable pruning
2. Is it necessary to run the full node?
3. What benefits will I get if I run full node?
The first time you open Bitcoin Core, it'll display a " Welcome Screen", there you can set both prune settings and the custom data directory. This is best answer since it seems OP haven't run Bitcoin Core yet. And for reference, here's example screenshot of the welcome screen.  The apperance would be slightly different since i use Linux, while OP use Windows. And take note you'll need almost extra 12GB of free storage space to store folder called "chainstate", which is necessary to run prune node. Actually it's always better to run a full node if you can, since you are not going to be depending on a third party to verify a block and as mocacinno said it improve decentralisation of the Bitcoin network.
Pruned nodes are also full nodes. IMO it's up to debate. Although it's more important to state that pruned node doesn't depend on third party (aside from Bitcoin Core developer). |
|
|
|
User: Kalam001Additional information (optional): * This user suspected using chatbot, see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.msg64042639#msg64042639. List of post: Hello,
I notice that the Bitcoin database is stored sequentially in blk*.dat files, with an average size between 128 to 134MB. I would like to know how this average size is determined and if there are any tests that demonstrate this size is the most efficient.
Regards.
Numerous variables, such as the volume of transactions, block size, and data storage needs, affect the size of the Bitcoin blockchain database, which houses all transaction records, but it keeps growing as new transactions are added to the network. And also size is subjected to change and may have changed from my previous update. Since efficiency varies depending on the situation, there are no certain tests that show the size of the Bitcoin database to be the most efficient. In contrast, Bitcoin's database size is frequently found to be more efficient than that of conventional banking systems when it comes to specific tasks like transaction processing and verification. 1. blk*.dat files and Bitcoin blockchain are 2 different thing. blk*.dat files refer to how Bitcoin Core software store Bitcoin blockchain data, where each full node software could store Bitcoin blockchain data differently. 2. It doesn't answer why each blk*.dat files have size with average size between 128 to 134MB. 3. While it's possible to store arbitrary data on Bitcoin, it's not designed as data storage. 4. There's no strong correlation between database size and transaction processing/verification. Does anyone have a list of cloud storage services that will accept BTC? which one is the best? I think someone had a non KYC list which had some.
I have found Koofr but I want to see some more to compare prices. Someone mentioned Sync but it requires KYC or at least when paying they ask for all details.
Also, what happens to your files if you forget to pay? they delete them or they keep them? I have never used this.
Although I believe it was extremely irresponsible of you to forget to pay for what was delivered to you, when someone does not pay, their account or file may be disabled or they may not receive the thing they purchased. Additionally, you must carefully follow all instructions when making a purchase to avoid losing money or having your account or file blacklisted. 1. Cloud storage usually doesn't lock your file immediately if you stop paying them. Here are some relevant webpage i found, 2. User shinosuke ask question in example scenario, but it was responded as if user shinosuke actually forget to pay. |
|
|
|
The idea is a network of decentralized "virtual schools" (book publishers, teachers/educators, instructional designers, institutions, motion graphic artists, anyone) authoring and publishing Dopalearn compliant training (aka "Pop-up Training") and monetizing it. Each school licensed and provided with "keys" (housed in the NFTs) that allows their customers to use/open them (the training) in Dopalearn. So technically, the NFT will be housing the course metadata (source of the JSONs/mp3s) and the license/key that makes it Dopalearn compliant.
Does that mean all party (customer, school, etc.) depends on Dopalearn server (which is centralized) to access the content? If yes, i would call your idea is centralized or semi-centralized "virtual school". Hey ABCbits, So if the content is authored, hosted, and monetized on their side (i.e. their website) and minted as NFTs which can be loaded by the parent in Dopalearn after purchase, then it's decentralized, right? The only thing Dopalearn will doing is initially loading (locally caching on the child's device) the training elements (JSONs and MP3s) per the metadata in the NFT (course). We use Lottie for the animations so its all ultra light weight (for example, the English alphabet course below is 1.3 mbs, that includes 26 animations and 26 mp3s): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYF7ZymNCN0Personally, i would say it's less centralized than storing everything on Dopalearn. And if you store the content on blockchain, i expect it could be costly even with compression (or other method to reduce content size). |
|
|
|
Looking at this part of the documentation, it's not efficient in terms of TX size. An Arch Indexer, constantly listening for new bitcoin blocks, checks each transaction in the new bitcoin block to see if it fits within this invocation format: OP_FALSE
OP_IF
OP_PUSH "arch"
OP_PUSH "state"
OP_PUSH "insert_state_string_here"
OP_PUSH "psbt"
OP_PUSH "insert_base64_psbt_string_here"
OP_PUSH "inputs"
OP_PUSH "insert_stringified_input_json"
OP_ENDIF It have same problem of Ordinal where you need to create 2 TX, where 1st TX create new Taproot address (which have condition to reveal the arbitrary data) and 2nd TX include the arbitrary data. |
|
|
|
This would make a JoinMarket-style CoinJoin network possible where users could participate with their SPV wallets (Electrum, Sparrow et al.).
Am I missing something? Does such a service perhaps already exist?
https://joinstr.xyz somewhat match idea you described. |
|
|
|
I'm genuinely asking to learn. - But couldn't developers already store arbitrary data within the blocks if they wanted to before Segwit? I remember there was a marriage certificate "in the blockchain" and other arbitrary data.
Yes, through OP_RETURN, fake address and other means. If you also interested with the historical usage, check https://www.righto.com/2014/02/ascii-bernanke-wikileaks-photographs.html. Plus have there been proposals from the Core Developers?
Have you forget these PR? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29769https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408A person who uses Bitcoin in a way that you don't approve of, but paid the fees for block space, and followed the consensus rules is not a real Bitcoin user?
Whether they're real Bitcoin user or not, it's clear their transaction isn't created with goal of sending Bitcoin to someone else. |
|
|
|
The idea is a network of decentralized "virtual schools" (book publishers, teachers/educators, instructional designers, institutions, motion graphic artists, anyone) authoring and publishing Dopalearn compliant training (aka "Pop-up Training") and monetizing it. Each school licensed and provided with "keys" (housed in the NFTs) that allows their customers to use/open them (the training) in Dopalearn. So technically, the NFT will be housing the course metadata (source of the JSONs/mp3s) and the license/key that makes it Dopalearn compliant.
Does that mean all party (customer, school, etc.) depends on Dopalearn server (which is centralized) to access the content? If yes, i would call your idea is centralized or semi-centralized "virtual school". |
|
|
|
I've been exploring Bitcoin, though a bit late to the game, and I've been pondering how newcomers like myself can contribute in this space. Recently, while reading up on Bitcoin, I came across a post where the author obscured a few characters from their address but left the rest visible. This got me thinking: Is there a way to get the complete address from just the partial information? I've searched online for such a tool but haven't found one.
So, I'm considering whether to pursue the development of such a service myself. Do you know of any existing tools or services similar to this idea?
https://mempool.space/ might work if you know some character in the beginning.  |
|
|
|
You're talking about many things at once. So i only can suggest you to search information manually either on https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Main_Page or this forum using this search tool, https://ninjastic.space/search. And yes i know electrum did not exsist in 2009! I was using xml,json,sql…..
Do you mean you write your own mining / wallet software which use SQL database and use either XML or JSON format? |
|
|
|
Privacy sidechain? Liquid network might be what you're looking for since they implement Confidental Transaction. For something easier or lighter on Bitcoin on-chain, MimbleWimble or other form of non-interactive CoinJoin probably are better option than CT.
Litecoin, which signaled MWEB into activation in May 2022, has always been something of a test environment for features later implemented in Bitcoin. Litecoin was the 1st to have SegWit, a Lightning Network, and now MWEB, which is an optional privacy enhancing feature, used by Grin as default. I don't think it applies in this case. Looking at bitcoin-dev mailing, there's no serious plan to implement MimbleWimble on Bitcoin. Here's a pretty in-depth article about how it all works. I honestly don't see why this can't also be integrated with BTC, if miners signaled for it... maybe there's a good reason but I don't know what it is. It's not in-depth and only small part of the article actually talk about MimbleWimble. |
|
|
|
Do not mind my little knowledge about this, but I think people can run full node even without Bitcoin Core? There are other full node wallets.
It's true there are other full node software beside Bitcoin Core, but Bitcoin Core remain most popular one. It's also worth to mention Bitcoin Core still offer best performance, https://blog.lopp.net/2023-bitcoin-node-performance-tests/. Is that warning not pertaining to Bitcoin Core but to bitcoin generally?
IMO the warning only applies to Bitcoin Core software. All other nodes and miners still kind of depending on Bitcoin Core to run full node?
No, you can choose to other full node software or even write new one for your needs. But i expect most or all alternative use Bitcoin Core as reference. |
|
|
|
I agree with @LoyceV. But i'd like to emphasize that it's okay to ask question on those board.
I would be grateful if you reconsider your trust feedback on my profile. I see many member only reconsider such things after some time, so ask me again in a year or more. |
|
|
|
It wouldn't be surprising. Aside from potentially hindering Bitcoin adaption, privacy feature usually leads to higher TX size or longer verification time. In addition, gmaxwell propose Confidental Transaction back on 2015[1], but it was never added into Bitcoin protocol and added into Monero protocol (as part of RingCT) on 2017.
Monero is cool and has better privacy, but we need something that is easier to implement in Bitcoin protocol, maybe privacy sidechain would work great for this, without increasing TX size. Privacy sidechain? Liquid network might be what you're looking for since they implement Confidental Transaction. For something easier or lighter on Bitcoin on-chain, MimbleWimble or other form of non-interactive CoinJoin probably are better option than CT. Edwards Snowden think he's Satoshi Nakamoto, so he has a huge power to make the developers listen to him, while actually he's just an Average Joe in Bitcoin...
I wouldn't call him "Average Joe in Bitcoin" considering his history and expertise in computer security. |
|
|
|
Damn, i just write this statement 5 days ago. What is the assessment here? Are Wassabi developers comfortable continuing to operate their company and develop their projects as they currently do given the developments regarding Samurai wallet? Hopefully it through reduced to no US ties they will have no problems.
If they stop WabiSabi (name of their CoinJoin protocol) development or their mainnet WabiSabi coordinator now, people will assume the controversial blacklist[1] isn't effective to ensure survival of zkSNACKS and what they develop. So i expect they'll continue do what they currently do. [1] https://blog.wasabiwallet.io/zksnacks-blacklisting-update/Anyway, does that mean zkSNACKs also stop developing WabiSabi protocol or new privacy feature? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
