Bitcoin Forum
February 25, 2018, 06:37:37 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 [351]
7001  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Proof-of-work difficulty increasing on: February 16, 2010, 06:01:51 AM
I generated 5 blocks today on my Pentium processor. Two of them were within 3 minutes of each other.

I have noticed some slowdown since the adjustment, but I still generate a lot of coins. My computer is off while I'm sleeping, and BitCoin bootstraps quickly when I turn it back on. Do you guys-who-are-having-trouble have the BitCoin port open?
7002  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Incorrect Firefox Warning for Bitcoin website on: February 16, 2010, 05:17:17 AM
The CA's root certificate needs to be included in the browser to make the warning go away. CACert isn't included in any popular browser, and Startcom was only recently added to Windows. With Startcom, anyone who doesn't install the optional root certificates update in Windows update will still get an error in Chrome, Safari, and Internet Explorer. Firefox has had it built-in for a while.

HTTPS isn't the default (or really necessary) for bitcoin.org, so it doesn't much matter. If you want to manually switch to HTTPS, then you can deal with the self-signed certificate.
7003  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Incorrect Firefox Warning for Bitcoin website on: February 15, 2010, 08:43:04 AM
The TLS certificate is self-signed, so the warning is "correct". The encryption is just as strong as any other HTTPS connection, but without a CA's signature the site's identity can't be guaranteed -- a man-in-the-middle attack could be used. Unfortunately, getting a signature costs money.

Verifying the certificate's fingerprint here before adding an exception will prevent any MITM attack. This is only necessary when you add an exception; subsequent MITM attempts will trigger a warning by your browser.
7004  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Double Click Win32 Exe Installer = NCIS Error. on: February 15, 2010, 03:30:12 AM
It doesn't even detect bitcoin.exe normally, just when it's in the installer. I sent the file to ESET, but I don't know if they actually check into these things.
7005  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Double Click Win32 Exe Installer = NCIS Error. on: February 15, 2010, 12:43:10 AM
Turn off NOD32, download, and save to a different location than before.Then run the installer (the one you just downloaded). It's not a virus. You can turn NOD32 back on after the installation is complete.
7006  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What's with this odd generation? on: February 14, 2010, 09:46:58 PM
What property guarantees the continuing profitability? If the cost of electricity triples in 20 years, the number and size of transactions wouldn't change (as far as I know), but running a node would become more expensive and possibly unprofitable.

What stops someone from creating a client that will send repeated transactions just below the fee maximum when it has to in order to avoid fees? Or from many different identities to the same one (if this is possible)? I can see there being a great demand for such a client if BitCoin becomes very popular.
7007  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What's with this odd generation? on: February 14, 2010, 08:48:57 AM
Is the fee enough to always ensure the profitability of running a node, even when BitCoin generation stops being profitable?
7008  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What's with this odd generation? on: February 12, 2010, 08:31:52 AM
There's a small transaction fee for very large transactions.  (usually over 10,000 bc)  The node that generates the block that contains the transaction gets the fee.

The fee is based on the KB size of the transaction and intended to compensate the network for the resources used to process it.

If the same money gets sent again, it won't incur the fee again because it'll be small.  The first time they're bundling hundreds of 50 bc coins together.  After that it's just one line to send the combined unit.

Does the sending client send more BitCoins to account for the fee (so the recipient gets what he's expecting)? Why couldn't someone just send 1000 small transactions to bypass fees?
7009  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / What's with this odd generation? on: February 10, 2010, 06:31:40 PM
I thought BitCoin only generated in 50 coin increments, but I got 50.44 here.

Pages: « 1 ... 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 [351]
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!