That article definitely more recent. Although it's less detailed and bring little information if you read old article i mentioned. Developers have the freedom to write code, but we (the users) have the freedom to not run that code and go along with a client we are more ideologically aligned with Oh that means the final decisions lay in the hands of the community. Thanks the vagueness I had about Bitcoin core developers has been clarified. I'd rephrase it as: 'the final decisions lay in the hands of the full node operators'. Think of it this way: if core developers were to just introduce a change to the codebase without going through the regular BIP process and simply pushed it to the GitHub master branch, we'd just not update our nodes and the network would not adopt these changes. Bitcoin, the network of nodes, is very nicely decentralized globally, so no single entity can just change it without every node operator agreeing on these changes by installing the software update that implements them. It's not that simple though. Majority pool/miner usually need to support the change as well. |
|
|
|
Can anti-Bitcoin trolls use that to take advantage and spam the network? Yes they could, but it will come with a cost of paying higher fees. The bad-actors will waste their Bitcoins merely to cause a temporary inconvenience. From Bitcoin's viewpoint, where did it fail? Because it didn't. It's still chugging along producing block after block, incentiving miners for providing security the network.
Almost 2 months is more than temporary inconvenience[1]. [1] https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/charts/average-transaction-fee-usdTwo months might not be enough time to say that it will be permanent. I didn't say it'll be permanent. Plus the Core Developers would probably be in a better position to do something if they study the issue more slowly/carefully. Bitcoin is currently valued at almost $1,000,000,000,000. That's ALMOST ONE TRILLION. The developers SHOULD be more careful and they shouldn't do anything too hastily. Because if the network breaks, there goes the evolution of money.
Ordinals gaining popularity since early 2023 and it's not first time people add arbitrary data to Bitcoin blockchain or we experience high fees. I expect few Bitcoiner claim it's already broken due to high TX fees. And if they plan to introduce new change, they'll test it first on dedicate test network (such as segnet for testing SegWit) so they wouldn't break Bitcoin network. |
|
|
|
What do you mean by miners are too centralized? and why do you assume that makes bitcoin no longer decentralized? You need to learn more about the concept of decentralization in Bitcoin, because you are thinking about the wrong concept about it.
Bitcoin will forever be decentralized and that will not change, because no one entity is managing the Bitcoin network as they please. Moreover, the issue regarding fees has nothing to do with miners, it is all related to Ordinal and the bullish market which makes the network congested.
I mean, ordinary people like me are difficult to become miners. That's true. You need low electricity price and efficient ASIC in order to mine at profit. The disk is 500 G, the Internet must be fast, and computer costs and electricity costs are high. These are the thresholds.
You don't have to run full node to use Bitcoin. And FWIW cost to run full node is far lower than running altcoin full node. Therefore, in this world, Bitcoin has only 6,000 nodes. Most of them belong to one or two groups.
Actually it's about 16K[1] reachable nodes while number of all full nodes is higher[2]. And could you clarify by "one or two groups"? Moreover, there is no trustworthy exchange place for Bitcoin's decentralized transactions. We must be KYC and become legal members. BUT KYC is not a part of decenralization.
Exchange isn't part of Bitcoin network. And there are several exchange with no or optional KYC[3]. And this forum. I just posted a post about Satoshi, which was deleted for no reason.
I didn't see your post, but this forum isn't part of Bitcoin network. [1] https://bitnodes.io/[2] http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/software.html[3] https://kycnot.me/ |
|
|
|
It's fairly easy to open up a laptop and strip out the WiFi card, etc., and turn it in to an airgapped device.
Not for everyone.  I remember I broke hinges somehow while opening the back panel for switching SSD, so better leave the job to professionals. It also depends on the laptop itself. Certain brand or thin laptop usually is more tricky to be modified. Using old device for air-gapped wallet is okay but if someone is really going to save few thousands worth of BTC then better spend few hundreds to buy hardware wallet or value for money brand new laptop that can last for atleast 5 years with no issues.
FWIW some old device also can last for really long time with some maintenance. Some older Thinkpad T series models also have this physical switch, but I am not sure you can disable everything in any proprietary bios with any switch.
I was thinking is there any ways to make a smartphone air gapped? Removing Wifi/Bluetooth chip or driver from smartphone usually is far harder, so your option usually is limited to always on airplane mode. And aside from AirGap Knox, Electrum Android should have all necessary feature to create wallet on air gapped device. |
|
|
|
I just hope the miners get tired of all these.
miners are not involved.. they have no decision on transactions POOLS decide on the transactions.. hope POOLS get tired of it But since the mining pool is a group of miners they still can't do anything with it. --snip-- But don't expect pool to follow miner's demand, unless many of them retaliate by moving to different pool. Can anti-Bitcoin trolls use that to take advantage and spam the network? Yes they could, but it will come with a cost of paying higher fees. The bad-actors will waste their Bitcoins merely to cause a temporary inconvenience. From Bitcoin's viewpoint, where did it fail? Because it didn't. It's still chugging along producing block after block, incentiving miners for providing security the network.
Almost 2 months is more than temporary inconvenience[1]. [1] https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/charts/average-transaction-fee-usd |
|
|
|
|
I think you forget to add list or explanation what QChartist does. While i know it's supposed to be open source charting software, i wonder about these,
1. Is there any screenshot of the software or short example of using it?
2. Where can we see the source code?
3. Windows 7 is dead. Consider remove Windows 7 icon from your homepage.
|
|
|
|
|
If known scammer and people who use chatbot to create post isnt banned, i dont expect troll will be banned either. At least digaran occasionally bring different perspective or opinion where other member hesitate to say about it.
|
|
|
|
1. If you use Bitcoin sidechain (layer-2) for payments, you will reduce the fees, keep topic in the Bitcoin board, and you can then use L-BTC or LN using a self-custodial wallet in the Bitcoin service board.
2. ask users to make Bi-weekly/monthly payments.
Those side chains are also altcoins. Only lightning network payment will be valid but I do not think there are wallets that can give you send to many invoices. I disagree. While sidechain has it's own blockchain, it rely on Bitcoin blockchain. For example, Rootstock sidechain is secured by BTC miners through merge mining mechanism. You also can convert between Bitcoin which located on-chain and side-chain using the network directly by yourself. And LN isn't viable option unless you want to pay few dollars just to open a channel. |
|
|
|
Although personally i'd rather avoid dynamic block size altogether since there's concern it could be manipulated by miner who decide which and how much transaction included on their mined block. Not only that. There is an attack, that could lead to fast verification for the attackers, and extremely slow verification for everyone else. --snip-- It's also worth to mention miner/pool might offer premium service where they include non-standard transaction. For example, Luxor include almost 4MB NFT on their block[1] where it's available on their professional service category[2]. --snip--
Then, your strategy is simple: always fill the whole block with your dummy transactions, no matter what.
1. It doesn't affect miners, but only competing mining pools (and their block verification time) or other full nodes.
2. It doesn't affect your network, because by knowing master public key, your nodes can skip those transactions as valid.
3. It forces high fees all the time, because even if blocks will be full, then your self-transfer will always fill the remaining space, and make some fee market.
4. It centralizes the network, because if blocks are bigger and bigger, then only your nodes can know upfront, which transactions are fake, and can be skipped as valid. Everyone else waste time on your dummy transaction verification.
But there's downside where overall block propagation is slower since compact block can't be used due to most node doesn't have your transaction on it's mempool. [1] https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/02/giant-bitcoin-taproot-wizard-nft-minted-in-collaboration-with-luxor-mining-pool/[2] https://docs.luxor.tech/ordinalhub/faq |
|
|
|
Hopefully, the number of alts might drop if/when 2FA becomes mandatory. (And new users should have to employ 2FA automatically)
I do not think that 2FA will affect anyone operating alts. Different emails solves this and it is app base. I doubt different email solve when you could just use plus feature like this, example+1@example.com
example+2@example.com
example+3@example.com
In addition, email forwarding service let you generate "unlimited" email address such as https://www.33mail.com/. |
|
|
|
Nobody's bothered posting what Adam Back had to say about the situation, so here you go:  I'd rather not pay $9.67 (current high priority fee from https://mempool.space/) just to open LN channel when i don't plan to pay with Bitcoin frequently. And while you can exchange for Bitcoin located on sidechain (such as L-BTC and R-BTC), you'll need to prepare altcoin or fiat if you want to avoid high fees on Bitcoin on-chain. |
|
|
|
flexible block size were proposed, where the maximum weight is adjusted by demand or there are incentives to miners to adjust the blocksize carefully if needed.
This would be better than treating transactions differently, in my opinion. However, it has to be implemented similarly to how XMR does it. Raising the block size would result in a reduction in the block subsidy; otherwise, whatever the max cap is will always be activated by greedy miners. This would lead to larger pools absorbing all available well-paying transactions, leaving smaller transactions with almost nothing. --snip-- How about BIP 104, 106 and 107? Although personally i'd rather avoid dynamic block size altogether since there's concern it could be manipulated by miner who decide which and how much transaction included on their mined block. |
|
|
|
1. Windows laptop (as of now, easier for me)
Is a setup including a 16GB RAM and Intel Core i5 (12th or 13th generation) sufficient to run a node and do some data analysis (Python, SQL) simultaneously? I know it is not easy to answer such a question, but I would appreciate your opinion.
Probably yes. You can configure how much RAM used by your SQL database. And after you download all blockchain, you can setup Bitcoin Core to use less RAM as well without much problem. Just don't try to load all data to RAM at once. Or can I simply disconnect my SDD (where the blockchain data is stored) from my node for a few hours and download the blockchain data directly to my other laptop?
Yes, assuming you use Bitcoin Core to download blockchain data. Will it cause problems if my node is offline for several hours or does it just need some time to synch once it is online again?
It's the latter. 2. Rasperry Pi
I am eager to run one node on the Rasperry Pi for the previously mentioned reasons and to get more familiar with Linux. Accumulating knowledge and skills will take time but I am willing to invest the time.
I expect Raspberry Pi will struggle for data analysis. |
|
|
|
Namecheap is a good one. I have bought multiple domains, and a couple of hostings before, and I was never asked to verify my identity. I still use them to this day.
But take note their support page state they can ask you to perform identity and payment verification[1]. The same thing applies to Vultr, I never had any issues with them but I did see a couple of users here saying they did ask them for personal info before.
I also recall they require you to use credit card or paypal before you can pay with cryptocurrency. [1] https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx/10520/45/identity-and-payment-verification/ |
|
|
|
I'd just treat them as SEO spam. In addition, many of thread/reply they create are extremely similar. Anyway, i reported all of them and let's see whether moderator nuke them. Edit: Here's current report result. 2 Good, 1 Unhandled and 1 Bad. None of them got banned or nuked. If we want to see those user got banned or nuked, i expect we'll need separate thread which contain more detailed report/explanation. |
|
|
|
If you use the forgotten-password function, then there's an option to remove the 2FA. So 2FA does not provide any protection in case of a compromised email. Make sure that your email address is secure.
It somewhat limit security offered by 2FA, but i guess we could just set 2FA on our email address. In conclusion using the 2FA you have to be a kinda speedy because the code expires every minutes.
And that's just how app-based 2FA usually works. Hopefully, the number of alts might drop if/when 2FA becomes mandatory. (And new users should have to employ 2FA automatically)
Can we have a shield to indicate we have 2FA enabled, please?
Kudos.
Could you explain how mandatory 2FA leads to less alts? After all, it's app-based 2FA. |
|
|
|
Beginners and help board is sufficient. A member could just ask for ELI5, although it's up to other member how well they can explain things as simple as possible. Although for complex stuff or specific question, ELI5 doesn't seem to be possible.
This is what I thought would be the problem too, that it's going to be difficult to explain some of the crypto information like you're talking to a 5-year old, it's going to be difficult task especially if there's not a lot of people that are adept at that field and it's difficult to do it to those that will answer the questions and do the explaining because if they only have a surface knowledge, they're bound to have a hard time dumbing down the answers to make it easy for someone to understand and also there's the terms that are really difficult to explain like cryptospace, cryptocurrency, bitcoin core and many more. Yeah, it's very rare to see great simple explanation about new or complex topic ( an example for LN). Even those who somewhat familiar with the topic usually tends to use unfamiliar terms. Maybe just copy the answer of the other users to your questions and then paste it in ChatGPT then ask the AI to simplify it or do a prompt like this: "Explain this next sentence like you're explaining it to a five-year old kid." From there you can tweak the prompt to make specific requests to your liking.
It's rather controversial idea though, especially if you don't put discalimer that ELI5 comes from other user reply with help of ChatGPT. And without double-check and some re-writing (which takes some time), i expect mixed result. |
|
|
|
|
If your friend going to blame anyone, most blame lies to people and group who create and facilitate BRC-20 transaction. If the developer were to make Ordinals (which used by BRC-20) non-standard or even invalid, they'll take major risk where they accused to censor Bitcoin and some people ignore update released by developers anyway.
|
|
|
|
In a nutshell: Could malware move sensitive data back and forth between the usb and the connected computers without you being any the wiser?
While there are many malware which spread over USB storage was very common, i only recall very few malware which also move sensitive data/file over USB storage with goal uploading to creator's server. On the contrary - I think it is mandatory. A software level airgap will never be completely secure, since you are one misclick or one accidental setting change away from re-enabling some form of connectivity and breaking your airgap. A hardware level airgap (i.e. connectivity hardware removed) will always be a safer option.
The only "problem" with airgapping is that it must be permanent as you said. Therefore, it must be dedicated to always being offline, both hardware and software-wise. And the problem with this is that one must buy this device only to use it offline which renders it limited to a small amount of tasks. That's true. Aside from networking, you'll only use small portion of the storage and barely use the CPU/GPU. It's one of reason people also prefer to use their old PC or laptop. Raspberry pi is nice option. If you go for pi zero you may want to read about SeedSigner too. Using it as signing device is much more convenient than an offline computer imho.
Yeah this is exactly why I thought of using RPi Zero. The only problem is that I can't find any RPi Zero without WiFi (the non-W version). At least where I live, it's difficult to find. But if you can find W version easily, consider buying that and uninstall both WiFi and Bluetooth driver. |
|
|
|
I see OP edited his thread to add more clarification, so i decide to add new reply. >>This is not an issue with virtual environments, rather an issue with unreliable module compatibility.<<
In that case, why don't you ask people who create the module/library to pin required library to specific version. For example, >>A typical user is never going to resolve this, therefore any application released in Python must be considered non-production.<<
Typical user doesn't have to touch Python anyway. They should just run installer or portable executable which already contain all required file. Electrum already does that with installer, portable version and AppImage. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
