The thread is too long to ask for info, but has there been a final consensus here on how to treat such accounts?
No. But moderators on technical board have left few neutral or negative feedback to such account. And they sometimes they don't even bother add reference link. Is it okay to leave them at least a neutral tag as a warning that they are forum-rank farmers? I believe that the negative tag is too much.
Maybe it's okay when moderators also do that. IMO negative tag is okay if those account also share malware, fake software or other action which makes user could lose their Bitcoin easily. |
|
|
|
The chance is extremely low, so it's almost impossible.
Is it worse than the lottery? I read a bit about mining and different asics , so if you would invest in the newest mode wouldn't you have a chance of 1 in 2 million, and since a block is mined every 10 minutes instead of one week wouldn't that shorten the time? I don't know how to quantify the chances by the number of draws but looking strictly at number of, isn't that an average of 15 years if everyone would be solo mining with the latest model? I'm just asking not making a statement because I really don't know how to do the math on possibilities! It's not as bad as lottery. Here's basic comparison and calculation. 672.3 EH/s is equal to 672.3 million TH/s. So one Antminer S21 Hyd is only about 0.0000498289...% or about 1/2006865... of all miner hashrate. So your estimation ("chance of 1 in 2 million") isn't wrong. But considering hashrate growth and newer hardware in the future, the actual chance would be quite lower. |
|
|
|
Looking at example on that screenshot, i think it wants to tell us that it's bad when the link isn't related with the comment or topic. But IMO if it's really bad, we wouldn't see Growing SEO spam on Bitcointalk. |
|
|
|
User: 348JudahAdditional information (optional): - List of post: Lightning Network
The Lightning Network (LN) allows users of a digital wallet to transfer BTC to another without any fees. This is achieved by adding a second layer to the Bitcoin network to enable transactions between parties off the blockchain(off-chain transactions). I think you're missing out something from this part that you said transfer without any fee, lightning network is not a zero fee rate to use for making transaction despite is a second layer transaction, it is rather made subsidized, which means it has a lower fee rate and not a zero fee rate to use it, it addresses the issues of scalability, affordability and transaction speed all together. LN was meant to address Bitcoin scalability, thereby processing faster and lower cost transactions on the Bitcoin network. There have been speculations that the LN method isn't secure, as it exposes people's BTC to theft, but I hope to use it someday since I haven't come across any articles of stolen BTC due to LN. Please pardon my excitement, but I think LN is really cool.
You may not have to believe in what everyone is saying, in other for you to learn more further on lightning network, read these threads All Lightning network threads in one. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5345664.01. Nobody subsidize fee when you use LN, whether we're talking about routing fee or on-chain TX fee when opening/closing LN channel. 2. Zero fee is still possible if LN node between sender and receiver choose not to charge any routing fee. Which Bitcoin wallet(not Bitcoin Core) allows users to send any fee?
Lets say I want to send a transaction with $0.01 fee or 0.00000001.
I know miners will never process the transaction, I see people doing this kind of transfer all around blockchain but I never found a wallet that allows it and my laptop has only 512GB, I can not download BTC core for this.
Don't make a too low transaction which may result into dust, others are doing doesn't mean it the right thing everyone can also do, the kind of wallet we make use doesn't determine the fee rate we are been charged, we only need to know when the mempool is less busy to accommodate lower transaction fees, our wallets used can also be used to modify the fee rate to a little adjustable rate which we can be able to afford for the transaction we want to make, so i will say that we make use of the kind of wallet that allows for that like electrum or blue wallet among others. 1. @entropybit asking about which wallet let user create TX with low fee rate, not create TX which create dust (output with small value). 2. Other points are correct, but not relevant with quoted @entropybit question. 3. Electrum (GUI desktop version) doesn't let you create TX with fee wanted by @entropybit. When it comes to privacy matters, we should know that it's either we have it or not having it at all, I know quite alright before now that Wasabi has been a good recommendation for use of privacy in the bitcoin community, but later on, there came about the discovery that makes the people doubt about their status quo with privacy offers since their involvement with other entities that does not support for that, I just wish they have always been as how they have started with before everything changed that users are now scared of securing their privacy with them.
Privacy is more complex than we have it or not having it at all. That's why some people talks about privacy threat model. Proton write fairy good blog about it on https://proton.me/blog/what-is-a-threat-model and https://proton.me/blog/internet-privacy. I think the configuration of the bitcoin core installation has been program by default to execute launch once the software client is being operated or initialized, the same way you happen to launch the software from the data directory, i don't know if ranochigo have additional information on this, but base on by perception, i think it will all run together by default at the same time when the software is launched
This reply is poorly written and it's hard to understand what it actually wanted to say. But it's clear that Bitcoin Core will not run automatically next time after you run it manually for first time. but idont have these huge specs and also poor internet so it'll take forever - Bitcoin Core requires just 2 GB of RAM, and about 700 GB for storage, which can be reduced by more than 90% if you enable pruning (with pruned=550). - How bad Internet connection? Downloading 700 GB shouldn't take more than two days, even in cases with very slow download speed. I wouldn't experiment with my money, if I were you (it is clear that you don't know what you're doing). You used Bitcoin Core to receive the bitcoin, use it again to recover it. The problem here that I dont even have 20 gigabytes free and the internet bad and still limited so If i spent money for getting another space and also for many times renew the internet quota it will be waste of money espicially that I dont know if there's a money or not (if I 100% know there is a money on it I'll spent the money ) In this case then I think it's very simple, if you think you value the quantity of assets worth on that wet with bitcoincore, then you shouldn't hesitate on getting a new device that could have the required specification of what is been needed for you to be able to use bitcoincore on your device, aside it seems you're not getting the whole idea of what had been suggested to you for using the pruning method in achieving this. This reply isn't helpful since, 1. New device alone wouldn't solve problem of slow connection. 2. Pruning node still require you to download whole blockchain. 3. On older posts, @Sadderr already state he already tried another way to access his Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Nonetheless, I'm curious as to what can be tweaked more, please be precise!
Only the document's title, everything checks out. BIP39 should be predominantly mentioned, should be something like " BIP39, Generation of Master Seed". Because not all HD wallets use mnemonic, for example, Bitcoin Core. In cases where the wallet doesn't follow BIP39 standard; the master seed ( seed, hdseed) is usually generated though pRNG, and not from a mnemonic. In addition, Electrum have it's own standard called "Electrum Seed Version System". |
|
|
|
I'm curious, which feature you're talking about? New transport protocol, new wallet formats and options. These are the very basic of Bitcoin that should not be touched without great necessity and majority consensus. Imagine I go to prison for 10 years. Or join army. Or enter coma after colliding with train. When I get back to my computer I should be able to turn on my computer and sync the Bitcoin client right away. Bitcoin now have become a value storage medium in addition to tool for transactions. Aside from what @achow101 said, personally i expect older version of Bitcoin Core still can connect to network and sync in the future. In 2022, Jameson Lopp manage to run full node with Bitcoin Core version 0.8 which released on 2013[1]. Although you would miss any performance improvement and bug/security fix. [1] https://blog.lopp.net/bitcoin-core-performance-evolution/ |
|
|
|
But regardless of their estimation, we can always set the fee manually, no?
Only if wallet you use let you do that. Few wallet simply doesn't let you do that or only let you choose between few fee rate choice. This could be also some custodial service. For example withdrawal from an exchange/casino/other payment system. Bad software exists everywhere... Many custodial service charge high withdraw fee to it's customer, but only use some of it to pay on-chain TX fee though. That means they still earn some profit, although they either don't know or don't bother optimize it further. Should I change feebuddy to 12hours interval, or keep 8?
I see lots of pages without comments, just fee buddy
IMO 12 hours interval sounds better, considering fee recommendation was lower than few months ago. |
|
|
|
I skimmed it and it looks good. Here's my short thought, and subsequently processes the collected data into a sequence of either 128- or 256-bit segments, comprising entropy.
In practice, most wallet software generate either 128-bit or 256-bit data. But actually you also could use 160, 192 or 224-bit data. Salting indicates the addition of salt, or random data such as a passphrase, before iterating the hash function, thereby mitigating precomputed attacks and ensuring uniqueness in hash values.
While it's true salting usually used to mitigate precompute attack, IMO there's no need to mention it since, 1. Generating all valid mnemonic words in advance is impossible. 2. Using CSPRNG prevent attacker performing precompute on specific range or values. |
|
|
|
Bad wallet? Some wallets have terrible fee estimation... I agree that this is very weird. But regardless of their estimation, we can always set the fee manually, no? Only if wallet you use let you do that. Few wallet simply doesn't let you do that or only let you choose between few fee rate choice. Maybe that guy transferring over 1 BTC didn't care about losing 76.39 USD? It's indeed a small amount comparing to what he transferred.
You might be right. But even if you live in developed country, that money still could get you few lunch. |
|
|
|
Would not C++20 requirement cause C++ runtime files being required on Windows and in turn not working on Windows7 or 8?
Looking at microsoft website, i don't think that would happen. Current versions of the Visual C++ Redistributable for Visual Studio 2015-2022 only support Windows 7, 8.1, 10, and 11.
Although i also wonder whether Bitcoin Core actually support Windows 7 or 8.
Also it appears that Bitcoin have catched mild form of featuritis causing bloat without reason.
I'm curious, which feature you're talking about? |
|
|
|
Looking at link mentioned by @Synchronice and data on https://mempool.space/graphs/mining/pools#1m, i have few thoughts. - You only mined 98 blocks in last month, which question effectiveness of your service. I don't think there are many people want wait few hours to few days before your pool mined a block.
- While ETH now have lower average TX fee, i doubt it's wise idea to only accept USDT (on ETH network).
|
|
|
|
The idea of a second layer that allows instant Bitcoin transactions with near-zero fees is extremely appealing, but the truth is that in practice, things are much worse in lightning. In Bitcoin, you can be a user by simply creating an address and checking its balance on a lightweight client. That's all you need to do. If you run a node and do that, even better, but it isn't a prerequisite.
In lightning, not only does running a full node become a requirement, but you need to run it 24/7. You can't pass a lightning address and go offline. Payments won't arrive if you're offline. Then, there's another partner to account for. What if they go offline? Or what if they decide to close their channel with you? This rises the overall transaction cost. Lastly, you can't be confident that your payments always complete. There may be routing failures on the way. This is another important distinction with on-chain transactions, where you can always be certain it will confirm eventually.
So, in my opinion, it's not that the network lacks improvements. It's fundamentally structured in such a way that it's difficult or impractical for it to spread and grow.
With all these technical aspects being mentioned, it's surprising how so many people boast about it(LN) whenever there is congestion. Could it be that so many people have mastered it so well? If they boast about LN without mentoing on-chain TX fee to open/close LN channel, then IMO they're not master or expert of LN. And again, can such complexity which somehow breaks the rules of Blockchain technology affect the BTC chain at some point?.
No. If on-chain TX (which created for LN purpose) violate Bitcoin protocol/rule, it's simply ignored and won't affect Bitcoin network. |
|
|
|
If this continues, total UTXO on testnet3 will surpass mainnet within a month.
I wonder how those people are getting all their testnet coins considering that only a few people appear to be mining it. They can't all be retrieving their coins from a faucet - that would most likely exhaust their supplies. Have you seen trading volume or total amount of "asks" altquick? There's also other place to buy/sell tBTC which doesn't disclose it's volume or available supply. |
|
|
|
It's far more than older hardware. i486 disconnected on 2007[1], while SATA (as successor of IDE) exist since 2003[2]. Although if you intend to keep using device with i486, consider NetBSD which claim to support i486[3]. Although FYI i386 which also disconnected on 2007[4] still supported by some Linux distro, such as Debian[5]. With just 8 GB RAM, Bitcoin Core is pounding my SSD at maximum capacity for hours during IBD. Even though it's just a one-time thing, it's only getting worse.
The solution to your problem is to get a more poweful CPU and alot more RAM. To be quite honest, that's the only solution to your problem. And maybe a faster SSD. Is your SSD NVME or is it SATA? Maybe you need to get an NVME one. If you happen to own computer with big RAM which can store all UTXO, using HDD should be fine. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I486[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SATA[3] https://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/i386/[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I386[5] https://wiki.debian.org/SupportedArchitectures |
|
|
|
To my greatest surprise, LN happens to be one of the most interesting parts of Bitcoin I have read about,
While LN development focused on Bitcoin network, the technology can be used on altcoin and you could even perform atomic swap between 2 coins (e.g. LTC and BTC) on LN. The Lightning Network (LN) allows users of a digital wallet to transfer BTC to another without any fees.
Aside from what @_act_ said, you still need to pay fee for on-chain Bitcoin transaction which is needed when opening or closing the LN channel. |
|
|
|
On top of that, i notice massive UTXO growth since 10 days ago. - Block height 2810957 (about 10 days ago): 121751208
- Block height 2815079 (when i write this post): 144886406
If this continues, total UTXO on testnet3 will surpass mainnet within a month. |
|
|
|
|
If you refer to brute forcing address with known range of private key, then it's impossible task. ASIC for mining Bitcoin only can perform SHA-256 while brute-forcing address perform ECDSA operation which convert private key to public key.
|
|
|
|
If you want to mine bitcoin, you will need to buy ASIC. This machine is very power and generated higher hash rates. Buy the new ones that produces more hash rates starting from S19 or higher version. You need cheap electricity. The ASIC consume electricity a lot. You will need to calculate the electricity the machine will be consuming before buying it at all. You can not mine bitcoin with GPU not to talk of CPU.
NotFuzzyWarm provided a link, read it to understand more.
Will I never mine a block with just one ASIC? The chance is extremely low, so it's almost impossible. Or, should I add my configured ASIC into a mining pool?
Yes. Although i would recommend you to check whether it's possible to make profit (based on that ASIC and electricity price) using Bitcoin mining calculator. Sorry in case it's not the right section to ask this question!
I'm available to read/study the right thread if you send the link to me, thanks!
First of all, have you read thread mentioned by @NotFuzzyWarm ? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
