Bitcoin Forum
November 17, 2018, 08:44:57 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.0 [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 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 72 73 ... 310 »
441  Other / Meta / Re: How can we stimulate Bitcoin Talk? on: September 01, 2018, 08:11:56 PM
The real problem is we can't find decent topic/discussion easily because it's covered by spam thread/post. With script/add-ons which show self-moderated thread or started by reputable/high ranked member, i could find some interesting topic even though it's a bit annoying.

Without remove/blacklist signature which owned by campaign which allow/don't care about spammer, most ideas won't work in reality.

The only way to get a decent conversation is to talk about difficult topics like this one for example.

It's not only difficult, but only developer/geek who would participate in such topic.

Since they have no idea what people are talking about, it's difficult to spam it.

Few still pretend they have idea and ultimately reported/banned. I still encounter few of those (about 5-10 posts/day based on my report history) on Development & Technical Discussion everyday.
442  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Superspace: Scaling Bitcoin Beyond SegWit on: September 01, 2018, 07:47:25 PM
I thoroughly reading the paper and i though your idea is similar with sidechain which have same rules with Bitcoin network.

I like the idea of increasing maximum block size without hard-fork/actually increase block size (from legacy nodes perspective), but besides that i don't see much advantage of your proposal since :
1. Complicate way/method, even though mostly only developer who feel it
2. Introducing another address standard which complicate UI/UX and probably confuse some people. Edit : instead of introduce new address prefixes/format, why don't you use use next witness version (bc1p)
3. Unlike SegWit which also solve malleability transaction, your idea don't have any

Im looking forward to another additional 12 to 24 months of drama comming from the so called community, so called devs, and miners alike, mixed with the big twitter megaphone guys trying to step in with so called "X place agreements" again.

I don't think we'll ever see another softfork similar to segwit. We somehow got segwit in and it seems to be working, but some still question that it is safe and always will (and have good arguments to think so)

The amount of controversy needed to get segwit in was incredibly insane. You would need to have a package of updates so good that it can be done again, and perhaps not without another round of transaction backlog either organic or spammed again.

I think no matter how good ideas are, unless bitcoin is pushed to its limits and this idea is presented as an acceptable solution by many relevant parties, we will not see further updates, definitely coming by way of hardfork, and very doubtfully by controversial softforks.

It naturally all depends on how contentious any new proposed fork is seen as.  The next softfork is likely to be Schnorr, unless I'm mistaken.  The only way I could see that one becoming controversial is if someone starts a bandwagon for BLS instead and a rift forms in the community again.  But then, knowing this community, that's a distinct possibility, heh.

Provided it doesn't become some polarised imbroglio like last time, it should hopefully be fairly straightforward.

A bit off-topic, but those who might start the bandwagon now currently have their own fight ongoing consensus.

Besides AFAIK, Schnorr verification time is slightly faster than current ECDSA while BLS is slower than both of them and people shouldn't have much decentralization concern.
443  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What new feature could potentially make bitcoin more valuable? on: September 01, 2018, 07:20:36 PM
How about adoption/usage of existing feature such as SegWit which have lower transaction fees and thus user spend less on fees? Besides most fancy features such as Smart Contract and Private Transaction have it's own trade-off/scalability problem such as more potential security hole, bigger data size and longer verification time.

But IMO, Bitcoin acceptance as currency or payment method followed with mass adoption are the best way to make Bitcoin more valuable while make people realize the actual value/usage of Bitcoin.
444  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: BitMaximum.io - More privacy during Bitcoin exchange / Coin mixer on: September 01, 2018, 07:09:14 PM

I agree, just by ask them few technical questions/seeing reply, it's clear they they're not expert at manage privacy/anonymity. At this point, using private and fungible cryptocurrency is better.

But how many shops use private cryoptocurrency. Nobody wants to use Monero or Dash. But everybody wants to use bitcoin. It is necessary to make bitcoin  anonimiuse.

Private currencies for now is not the dicission of the problem.

As i mentioned previously on few previous post, altcoin users have choice to use services which help you make Bitcoin payment by deposit altcoin to their website such as https://xmr.to/.
Altcoin adoption/usage isn't as low as you think since both cryptocurrency's community you mentioned are solid and there's decent amount of merchants[1][2] which accept those cryptocurrency.

Besides, even though it's possible to make Bitcoin fully private and fungible, that won't happen because :
1. Require acceptance by majority of community
2. Require hard-fork which means there's extra works for wallet/service developer
3. Most private/fungible technology sacrifice decentralization in different way (verification time/memory requirement, transaction size, etc.), expect for Schnorr Signature and MAST (CMIIW).
4. There's already few cryptocurrency which specialized in this matter

1. https://getmonero.org/community/merchants/
2. https://www.dash.org/merchants/
445  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Step by step guide to go from public key to a Bech32 encoded address on: September 01, 2018, 03:26:19 PM
Great guide and mostly it's easy to understand. But i don't understand the 8th steps, is it encode/decode result from Bech32 characters?
446  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Ethereum EIP 1234 accepted on: August 31, 2018, 08:15:00 PM
Since ETH/EThash ASIC already exist, i doubt this EIP would be useful since GPU miners will be kicked because ASIC, just like with Bitcoin in the past.
Even if ProgPOW proposal is accepted and used, i'm sure people will make an FPGA for EThash since it's specification/limit is known.
447  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: A Proposed Use For All The Lost Bitcoins on: August 31, 2018, 08:06:02 PM
We've no idea whether 4 million Bitcoin is really lost. It's only rough estimation and we've no idea if the lost coin is actually owned by long term HODLer.

Lost bitcoins
According to an article made by Fortune, there are around 4 million lost bitcoins forever. Chainalysis claims that 17%-25% of Bitcoins total supply has been lost forever due to original coins minted and early investors not paying attention to them, and transactions mismanaged. It is claimed that Satoshi Nakamoto owns around 1 million BTCs but no one can back that claim and they haven’t been in movement for years, maybe they are held as reserve when we mine all bitcoins? Anywho, according to the research there are $5-$20 Billion worths of bitcoins lost forever.

What if we could make a new bitcoin while containing all the original aspects and not hard forking it?

There are many major problem such as :
1. How do you determine which coin is lost without rely on centralized analysis
2. It's impossible to do your idea without hard-fork since the only way to move Bitcoin is by knowing it's private key.

Token Swap
Tokens that use Ethereums ERC20 standard and wanted to leave the network for their main network have used the token swap method. This method consists of migrating old tokens into the new protocol leaving the old ones behind useless. Tron, EOS, and Vechain have migrated all their tokens into the new protocol consisting billion of dollars in movement. This process is easier said than done, but it’s definitely possible.

So basically move to entirely new Blockchain and delete/remove all transaction/address history?
This could weaken Bitcoin security and swap process is dangerous unless they use completely decentralized method.

Bitcoin token swap
What if we would migrate all the bitcoins in circulation, keep all the components but take recreate all the “lost” bitcoins and set them aside for mining rewards, social impacts, or anything with a decentralized community driven vote. The scarcity of bitcoin will stay intact as there will be always 21 million bitcoins, but the mining reward can be increased to incentive more miners to join the network.

If the way to determine "lost" bitcoin is just by check last transaction date to spend the coins, then HODLers would be forced to move their coins regularly.

What other solutions or uses do you see good fit and fair for the 4 million Bitcoins? Let me know what you think, we are all trying to make the bitcoin network more reliable for different uses such as a store of value, currency, cross border transactions, investment tool etc.

There aren't any way fit or fair way for the "lost" Bitcoins and IMO we should left it alone.
448  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: What is blockchain? Great resource to share with friends on: August 31, 2018, 07:30:49 PM
I wouldn't use that page since it's too long for newcomers, especially if they don't have small technical knowledge.

Usually i use Simply Explained - Savjee channel as introduction/basic explanation since even people who barely can use Computer/Smartphone should able to understand.
Also, Blockchain Expert Explains One Concept in 5 Levels of Difficulty on youtube might be great resource whether they're novice or expert, even though i haven't watch it yet.
449  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: BitMaximum.io - More privacy during Bitcoin exchange / Coin mixer on: August 31, 2018, 07:19:15 PM
1) could You clarify the question please?
We do not really understand where in our system Schnorr Signature is needed and for what? It doesn't work anywhere else at all. This is a part of the fork of Bitcoin, when it will work fine no one knows! It seems to us that it is too early to talk about it. It have been talking for a year and a half about it, but still just toking. It's not even BIP yet. When this fork will be implemented and most nodes will support it, we will find a way to further maximize our customers with these new features, but now it is unnecessary.

AFAIK Schnorr Signature offers few features such as improved privacy and i simply thought people with privacy concern or privacy-centered services would be interested.

3) Bech32 is a new format of SEGWIT addresses. Making a deposit in our direction, we don't care what addresses will be sent bitcoins. We do not withdraw Bitcoin for Bech32, we don't support it.
To do this we need a little time, in the first half of September we will do it.
It is also necessary to check with our clients whether they want us to provide  Bech32 address to withdraw, is it necessary for somebody? If someone wants, we will do it in September. No problem.

While it's not really necessary since anyone just can use legacy/nested SegWit (using P2SH/address starts with '3'), i'm sure few people withdraw to Bech32 address use it if it's available. Besides, SegWit adaption slowly increasing.

~
What else did you expect from someone who is paying shills to bump his thread every couple hours? Roll Eyes

Too many shit/scam mixers in the market these days.

I agree, just by ask them few technical questions/seeing reply, it's clear they they're not expert at manage privacy/anonymity. At this point, using private and fungible cryptocurrency is better.
450  Other / Serious discussion / Re: Hypnosis as a means of retrieving lost mnemonic seeds. Has anyone tried this? on: August 31, 2018, 06:54:53 PM
If you still have wallet files from 2009 and there's way to verify the wallet isn't corrupted, then i think it's worth to try hypnosis. Just make sure you can pay the cost in case your wallet is empty, unless you're into gambling.
Also, in past i've read few people offer hypnosis specifically to help cryptocurrency investor help remember their wallet password/mnemonic seed.

I bet it would be quite difficult to remember whole private keys even when hypnotised

I doubt anyone can remember private key (whether it's in 256-bit/WIP form), unless they have photographic memory.
451  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: ZenCash | Horizen - Officially Announces NO ANTI-ASIC FORK - RIP GPU Miners on: August 30, 2018, 05:16:55 PM
Looks like the developer there's no truly ASIC resistant PoW algorithm and it's only matter of time until ASIC manufacture create another one, especially if they only slightly tweak it's PoW algorithm just like Monero which is extremely difficult.
But if they don't care about significant network hashrate change or don't care about hard-fork, then it shouldn't be difficult task for developer.

I suggest OP read this article (ASIC Resistance is Nothing but a Blockchain Buzzword), then you might understand their decision.
452  Other / Meta / Re: Shit posts police on: August 30, 2018, 12:27:06 PM

Mods have other attributes, I was thinking more of a subordinated person to mods.

Mod = Captain
Shit Posts Police = soldier


We already have:
Global Mods - Can moderate all ranks of users and posts anywhere on the forum
Local Mods - Can moderate all posts in their section only and Newbies
Patrollers - Can moderate posts from Newbies in all sections

No to sure how many active Patrollers we have though TBH

Basically you're just asking to add more Patrollers.

I didn't know Patrollers is exist, but i suddenly think slightly different idea.

1. Patrollers report/mark post that violate forum roles (if it's created by member with higher rank)
2a. If a post/thread reported/marked by some Patrollers, then the post/thread is deleted automatically.
2b. If the report/mark count/percentage less than threshold (but not too low), then moderator could check the post before make decision.

But obviously the threshold and list of the Patrollers should be kept as secret to reduce abuse attempt. The threshold of each section should be different and section without many spammer should have higher threshold.

Everyone in the forum has an option to delete spam. You just report it. It will be dealt with. People looks to complain all the time about the spam issue and it would be better if they had a personal delete button. But yet they dont even report them when they see them. So why should they have a delete button?

Some members do, you simply don't know about it.

Theymos also mentioned there's at least 195 users who actively report (have at least 300 good reports AFAIK)

BTW, currently 195 users would have some icon, and only 9 users would have the highest-tier one.
453  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Block Size Scalability Issues on: August 30, 2018, 12:16:23 PM
We need massive amounts of settlement tx's on-chain, when people open & close channels on the Lightning Network and the price of a bitcoin must grow exponentially for miners to be profitable.  Undecided

With a big user base who is transacting daily on the LN, there will be enough on-chain transactions.
And if not, the fees for the on-chain transactions will be low enough for users to be attracted by on-chain tx's again.
I believe this will find an equilibrium.

Besides, these reason also makes miners still could get decent amount of TX fees :
1. Few people who don't want to use LN (due to various reason)
2. Services that too lazy to implement LN
3. People who prefer on-chain transaction for big/important transaction
4. LN (or most channel payment) still require at least 2 on-chain transaction (open/close channel), unless with other implementation such as Channel Factories

...
Unfortunately it's impossible with current PoW algorithm/consensus method since people who have most efficient ASIC with cheapest electricity always win and in PoW, the winner takes all.
...

This may be true in theory, but in practice most miners are part of a mining
pool. Therefore they participate in the block reward every time that someone
from their pool "gets lucky" and manages to claim the block reward.

In the long-run this smoothes out the mining income and enables mining
on a more industrial scale. Of course there is still the possibility of mining
less than your expected share for a long time, but still taking part in a mining
pool reduces the variance inherent to a system that was designed as a
winner takes all system.

I wonder how Bitcoin would have turned out if we had never seen the emergence
of mining pools. The hashrate would probably be lower, because higher variance
would have made long-term planning and therefore industrial mining much more
difficult.

That means mining pool only reduce PoW's inherent system and majority still don't get anything (including big miners on other pool). Besides, it's trade-off if the miners care about anonymity/decentralization (even though almost one cares).

If mining pool is never exist, only people with big funds is able to mine Bitcoin while maintain profit, unless lots of people with low funds rely on luck.
454  Other / Serious discussion / Re: Telegram may now disclose your data when requested by the court on: August 30, 2018, 10:24:59 AM
Will this affect the usage of Telegram by cryptocurrency community?

Yes, if the one who use it have big concern of their privacy/anonymity. But mostly won't be affected since most common Telegram usage is only for ICO, Bounty/Promotion and Giveaway.

Will we have to move somewhere else?

No, unless for those who have concern of their privacy/anonymity.
455  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 3 Types of Consensus in Bitcoin on: August 29, 2018, 05:42:04 PM
Great article as usual Smiley

Since we're talking about consensus, we should know that consensus only can happen if more than 50% is being honest. Additionally, in Bitcoin we have consensus about Bitcoin improvement which Fiat Money don't have, unless on under huge public pressure.
456  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Verifying the Existence of Digital Assets - Audit on: August 29, 2018, 05:32:21 PM
Additionally they could Mixing service at some point if they have bad intention or knew they would be audited someday.

More info : https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mixing_service

The Electrum devs have come up with a proposed method... But as far as I'm aware, it has not been implemented by any other wallets at this time.

AFAIK they still not sure whether wait for Core developer made a standard or follow Trezor standard(https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues/3861)

Everyone will need to use Electrum, or you'll need to use "legacy" (aka "1-type") addresses

Or have multiple up-to-date wallet or/and hardware wallet
457  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Block Size Scalability Issues on: August 29, 2018, 05:08:05 PM
Bitcoin mining doesn't have to be for everyone(*), only the most efficient ones will keep up.

(*) If Bitcoin mining would have been for everybody, big changes would have been needed, see Monero.

This is a centralized approach to the issue though. Why not making available to anyone instead of excluding users from it?

Unfortunately it's impossible with current PoW algorithm/consensus method since people who have most efficient ASIC with cheapest electricity always win and in PoW, the winner takes all. You even need KYC just to buy ASIC these days

Besides, there are few alternative consensus method such as PoCW[1] and PoC[2] which have goal to make every user can participate on network with it's own pros and cons.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4438334.0
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-space
458  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: A new consensus that promises high levels of security (PoH) on: August 28, 2018, 10:34:54 AM
Bitcoin and most cryptocurrency supposed to be trustless and use consensus method which enable trustless, so IMO this consensus isn't practical at all. Why don't we back using fiat/bank if high degree of trust is required in here.
I also check their explanation (https://www.geeq.io/the-most-secure-blockchain) and they vaguely explain the PoH which don't help at all.

I agree on your points. However, in PoW hasing power is concentrating to 1-2 maximum 3 mining pools so in my opinion this dosn't make them "honest" 100%. Of course, there is a possibility to do a fork if they attack the chain, but wouldn't that affect the reputation of the PoW consensus?

That also applies to most consensus method, but in PoW and some kind PoS, there's punishment/wasting resource such as big amount of staked coins taken away or require million USD for ASIC/electricity when someone attempt to attack network.

As for "who decides who is honest or dishonest", the answer is "Users". People who would be affected by a wrong validation, in other words.

Just with this sentence, there are few critical problem such as :
1. How do they find out whether the user is real or don't have multiple votes/identity within the network?
2. Even if assuming they magically find way to solve 1st problem, people can be bribed, manipulated or have their device hacked to manipulate the vote.
459  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: How can I get started anonymously? on: August 28, 2018, 03:58:46 AM
Something that convenience isn't exist since all centralized service/web/wallet must comply with regulation or they will arrested/shut down.

But if you wish to stay anonymous and don't mind few extra steps, then i strongly suggest you to use DEX/LocalBitcoin to buy/sell Bitcoin and use real wallet (you have access over private key/seed) such as Bitcoin Core or Electrum,
460  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: GPU Manufacturing Giant Nvidia Leaves Crypto Mining on: August 27, 2018, 04:58:25 PM
That's totally understandable since :
1. Newcomers or anyone who've no idea about Cryptocurrency have bad views about PoW
2. Many new/popular cryptocurrency don't use or moving away from PoW
3. Majority of us know that AMD GPU is better to mine most PoW cryptocurrency Roll Eyes
4. Unlike gaming which have more stable market, cryptocurrency mining has always been risky and there's time when it's not too profitable (just like now) which means their market/demand isn't stable

But looks like the news source is only "clickbait" since few others news only mention that cryptocurrency mining don't bring much revenue to Nvidia now.
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 72 73 ... 310 »
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!