Bitcoin Forum
March 19, 2024, 04:57:48 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 [293] 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 ... 800 »
5841  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Which alternate currency is the future? on: June 28, 2013, 11:18:30 PM
Just because it's rarer doesn't make it any better.
It's just another useless altcoin with lower numbers.

This.  Radioactive human feces are probably pretty rare too but they don't have much utility.


The nominal number of base units is largely irrelevant.  Bitcoin for example would have worked just as well with:
210K total BTC valued @ $10,000 ea today
2.1M total BTC valued @ $1,000 ea today
21M total BTC valued @ ~$100 ea today
210M total BTC valued @ ~$10 ea today
2.1B total BTC valued @ ~$1.00 ea today
21B total BTC valued @ ~$0.10 ea today
210 B total BTC valued @ ~$0.01 ea today

5842  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: a billion flavors of altcoin vs a true electronic currency on: June 28, 2013, 11:04:35 PM
My personal opinion is also that SHA-256 is the best choice as an encryption algorithm

You obviously missed the news about NSA having troubles with encryption algorithms that use more than 256 bits, e.g. those that use less than
256 bits are more or less dead and buried.

Nonsense.  Still SHA-256 isn't an encryption algorithm.
5843  Other / Off-topic / Re: How to get rid of stubborn belly fat ? on: June 28, 2013, 06:12:33 PM
You need to do cardio, cardio, and more cardio.  Building muscle is great but if your six pack is under 2" of fat you can't see it without a scalpel.  

When running (or any form of cadio) make sure you keep your hear rate in the fat burning range.  Initially you will want to use a heart rate monitor eventually you will just be able to feel when in the zone.  Running too fast, too hard will spike your heart rate out of the zone.  At that work level your body can't efficiently burn fat and still provide the needed energy so it switches to only burning blood sugar.  So instead you will want to run slower/easier for longer periods of time.    If you are going to run remember running is destructive to the body (literally components are damaged, degraded) so you need off days.  Initially I would say run no more than 3 days a week and eventually you can bump that up to 4 or 5.  

TL/DR version:
If your goal is to lose fat you need to focus on cardioand keep your heart rate in the fat burning zone.  Once you burn off enough fat switch to a more varied work out regiment.  
5844  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Why does everyone keep calling them fees? They're not fees, they're BIDS! on: June 28, 2013, 03:11:08 PM
What I would like is for the receiver to be able to "bid".

e.g. Acme Corp is willing to pay 1 mBTC for every transaction regardless of what the sender buyer pays.

But I imagine that would require some changes to the protocol. Maybe if the payment address starts with a 1 there is no fee taken from the receiver, if the payment address starts with a, say, z - then then the minor is automatically allowed to take 0.5% of the transaction. Hell - just put z1 at the beginninging instead of 1. Or something.

Businesses that want higher odds of fast confirmation can use it as the payment address, potentially saving money in customer service queries.

No changes to protocol are necessary.  There are two options that can be done but would require some client/node changes (much easier than extending the protocol)

Option 1: Respend
One can (by protocol) spend 0-confirm transactions the client prevents this by that can be easily changed (we modified our bitcoind for this exact purpose).  The larger issue is that currently miners can't "see" the downstream transaction.  They should and when they can it will allow you to get confirmations by simply creating a new tx with a fee (this potentially could be done automatically via a sweep process).  This sweep process could even be designed to periodically only grab the "slow pays".  The node logs incoming txs and every hour looks for tx older than x minutes with no confirmations.  Those tx are bundled up into one sweep.

Example:
customer A sends 1 BTC (w/ no fee) to payment address X (A->X).  Your system detects this and creates a tx spending the entire output to X in a new tx (X -> Y) which includes a fee.  Mining pool has rejected tx A->X for insufficient fees but detects your paying tx (X->Y) meets criteria for inclusion in a block.  The mining node adds BOTH txs (A->X AND X->Y) into the next block.  The node has to add the A->X because the block will be invalid if X->Y is only included as a block can't include tx with unconfirmed inputs however there is no rule against both tx being in the same block.


Option 2: Off-blockchain fee payments (contracts)
A pool (or collection of pools) could make an agreement with a merchant to include all txs to their addresses (merchant could either provide a list or a deterministic public key seed) either on a per tx basis or potentially a monthly contract (i.e. up to 1,000 tx for Y BTC).    The mining node software would simply look for this "premium" txs and always include them first.
5845  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Mt.Gox is also not processing EUR SEPA wires - probably they are bankrupt on: June 28, 2013, 03:02:08 PM
I would have done that, unfortunately I sold BTC for EUR long before these announcements had been made.
Since these wires are now stuck at Mt. Gox there is no chance for me to just send the BTCs out to a credible exchange. Sad


MtGox customer support can cancel withdrawals in progress (or at least they have in the past).  It has to be done manually but you can open a support ticket, have them cancel the withdrawal, and buy BTC.  I mean if you are convinced your money is 100% lost anyways why wouldn't you.  Anything is better than -100%.
5846  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Boycott 0.8.2 on: June 28, 2013, 02:56:57 PM

Hi,

I don't understand why this is an issue -

If ver 0.8.2 is a problem, why not use 0.8.1 ?

Or someone recompile the 0.8.2 source with the changes you want/dont want ..

As far as I can see, no one has a central authority to decide anything on bitcoin.

The p2p network continues to work regardless of version ..

or am I wrong ?

MK

It is not an issue.  You don't even need to recompile or build an alternative client.  Dust is set at 54.3% of min relay tx fee amount.  By default that is 0.1 mBTC (10,000 S) and thus dust is 0.0543 mBTC (5,430 S).  If you disagree with the default all you need to do is add a line to the config file changing the default minimum relay fee amount to a lower (or higher) amount.

Due to a potential zero confirm double spend attack (which only affects clients prior to 0.8.2) and a memory crash denial of service attack (which only affects clients prior to 0.8.3) "boycotting" the latest client is horribly stupid advice.  Users should upgrade to 0.8.3 and modify their config file if they don't like the default values.



5847  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Let's Make a New Coin, the Credit Coin on: June 28, 2013, 02:25:58 PM
What is going on in here?!?!/! No seriously, what is going on in here? Backed... By time. Watch out!

Yeah. The number of coins is equal to the number of seconds that has passed. Time IS money.

By that "logic" all cryptocurrencies are backed by time.

Something is only backed by something when it can be redeemed/converted into it.

At one time a US dollar note was backed by gold.  You could redeem the paper note for 1 dollar (a unit of weight) worth of gold.  Hence a dollar of physical gold or a dollar note were worth the same.  The note was more popular due to the utility (easier to store, transport, count, etc).
5848  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-06-26 Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up, With Pro Marketing on: June 28, 2013, 02:14:33 AM
This is true.  However, my concern is that Bitcoin could possibly make it easier for people to do bad things, or get away with doing things a little easier.  

So does the internet, strong cryptography, and personal computers.  We likely should outlaws those too.

Bad people will use any EFFECTIVE tool to do bad things.  If something isn't useful for doing bad things, it means it is an ineffective tool and ... isn't useful for doing good things either.
5849  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Boycott 0.8.2 on: June 27, 2013, 09:13:03 PM
If you want more security use 0.8.2 or higher.  The issue you linked to only affects older clients.  Yes it comes from diffrent handling on non-standard transaction in 0.8.2 (and 0.8.3) but the only one negatively affected is older clients.
5850  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: a billion flavors of altcoin vs a true electronic currency on: June 27, 2013, 08:56:09 PM
I like what you did there!  But face to face transactions is not where the real problem of credit card fraud exists, that is by far and away a problem with internet transactions using credit cards.  Also, in a face to face credit card transaction the merchant can require photo ID and compare signatures if they want, affording another level of protection for themselves.

But as far as electronic currency and face to face transaction, if I was at the grocery store for example with a basket full of food, that would not be an inconsiderable amount for the merchant to potentially lose and I most certainly would not have time to stand around waiting for confirmations, stuff could be melting. BTC and LTC are simply not suitable for this kind of transaction in their present form.

Does your grocery merchant require you to pay with credit card 30-180 days before allowing you to take delivery of the food?  It the utility of virtual currency exceeds the rate of fraud it will be adopted.  Fraud doesn't have to be zero.  Actually trying to achieve that goal is likely futile and that system will lose out to one which is "good enough".


Quote
But you are right, it comes down to how often double spends cost them money.  But human beings while generally not very smart, tend to be very clever, and if they can figure out how to get away with double spend scams even on an irregular basis they will.

If humans can figure out how to use stolen, skimmed credit cards even on an irregular basis they will.  If humans can figure out how to lie about making a purchase (so called "friendly fraud) they will.  The reality is that they do both of these, everyday.  However the utility is worth more than the inevitable credit card losses and so merchants continue to use them.

Quote
Just as an aside, have you ever tried to reverse a credit card transaction?  First the bank will demand that you work it out with the merchant, which while fair enough, doesn't always work out.  If you go back to the bank and say that didn't work they make it a pain in the arse for you to get your money back.  You can sometimes do it, but it isn't remotely easy.  Depending on how exactly the transaction went down, the merchant can minimize the likelihood of having it reversed.

I have reversed plenty and it wasn't even remotely that hard.  Called the bank told them I tried resolving it with the merchant and the merchant wouldn't.  Bank get me conditional credit the same day and halted any finance charges (there were none but if there were they stop once dispute opens).  The bank mailed me a document, I signed it and mailed it back and had finalized reversal in about a week.  My understanding is that on smaller amounts the banks don't even require signature on chargebacks.

Quote
Maybe the real problem with this thread is that I'm dreaming to even imagine that a decentralized pseudo-anonymous electronic currency would ever be adopted for the kinds of circumstances I am talking about.  Maybe we are doomed to an electronic currency issued by something more like the world bank or goldman sachs.

No I think crypto-currencies can be used everywhere.  It can replace propreitary systems in emerging markets like mpesa, it can be used face to face, it can be used online, it can be used as large value settlements between large organizations.  It simply requires some out of the box thinking.

5851  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: a billion flavors of altcoin vs a true electronic currency on: June 27, 2013, 06:31:36 PM
BTC and LTC are both unsatisfactory for face to face real world transactions.  If you cannot be sure of the validity of your payment for close to an hour (or more really) then you are unlikely to hand over whatever I am paying you for.  If that happens to be lunch or a cup of coffee, that is clearly unworkable.

Credit cards and debit cards are both unsatisfactory for face to face real world transactions.  If you cannot be sure of the validity of your payment for close to 30 days (or more really) then you are unlikely to hand over whatever I am paying you for.  If that happens to be lunch or a cup of coffee, that is clearly unworkable.

Clearly given credit card fraud exceeds 0% and transactions can be reserved up to 180 days later, so Credit Cards never caught on for time sensitive purchases.   We all still use gold coins and carry around bullion scales.

Bitcoin doesn't need to be perfect it only needs to be better.  If the rate of double spend attacks in face to face transactions (especially low value ones like a lunch) is less than credit cards then a merchant loses LESS (keeps MORE) then they do by using credit cards.

5852  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Mt.Gox is also not processing EUR SEPA wires - probably they are bankrupt on: June 27, 2013, 06:25:05 PM
If you really thought MtGox was short funds wouldn't the smart thing be to buy BTC and withdrawal rather than just assume a complete loss?  I mean in what scenario would it make sense not to do that.
5853  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: How does the bitcoin client verify that an address has enough coins... on: June 26, 2013, 12:26:08 PM
That I get but I'm wondering about the UXTO list.  Is that created by the client after analyzing the block chain it downloads?  Does it keep the entire UXTO list (for the whole world) in a separate database or does it just keep transactions that relate to addresses in your wallet? 

There is no separate database but there is a UXTO index which allows quick lookup of transactions.  In theory one could prune the database such that only tx in the UXTO remain.  Your client updates the UXTO in realtime.  As it learns of new confirmed txs (via block notification) the inputs are removed from the UXTO and the new outputs are added.  The client attempts to cache the UXTO to memory (for faster verification) and flush spent outputs only to disk.  If you have sufficient memory available the overhead should be negligible and it allows near instantaneous lookup and valdation.
5854  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why is litecoin hyped so much when it doesn't add any value over bitcoin? on: June 26, 2013, 05:24:14 AM
Your clueless.  This so called "large but finite space" is so large that ....

if you converted all the matter in our solar system into a giant super computer and used all the power output of our sun for the next 4 billions years until it burned out you couldn't count to 2^256.   This assumes the computer operated at the themodynamic limit.  In essence a perfect solar system sized super computer.  That is just counting 1, 2, 3, .... 2^256.  You could maybe at absolute perfect efficiency get to ~2^216 which would mean you have counted through less than 1/100,000th of 1% of possible private keys.

5855  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Boycott 0.8.2 on: June 26, 2013, 04:35:00 AM
You have your minimum fee for accepting a transaction (0.1 mBTC default).
The dust threshold is just 54.3% of that. Basically anything under 0.5 mBTC won't be verified. relayed by nodes using the default value for the minimum relay fee on low priority transactions.

Corrected your post it is 0.1mBTC.  If a node still relays it (either because it has set a lower min fee or it is running different code) and a miner includes it in a block the transaction and block will still be accepted by the network.

Oh thank you for your correction. Just a question, do miners pull transactions from nodes to put them in solved blocks? Or are miners essentially nodes themselves. Never really got around to understanding that.

Miners are simply a node that also happens to create and publish blocks.  In the earliest client all nodes were mining by default as the client itself had a built in miner module which ran in the background. Miners in the context is the entity designing the block.  So called "pool miners" are merely hashpower suppliers.  Miners learn about new transactions the same way any other node does, they receive a message from a peer node.
5856  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why is litecoin hyped so much when it doesn't add any value over bitcoin? on: June 26, 2013, 04:33:24 AM
If the ECDSA is broken (address crypto), new coin time.

Not necessary. 
Develop a new address type based on an alternate public key system. 
Bitcoin addresses have versioning prefix these new addresses would have an alternate prefix. 
Get miner support for verification of new address type. 
Release new client which will verify transactions involving new address type but not allow their creation.
Once sufficient % of miners and nodes are on the new client release a new version which allows creation of new address type.
Users download new client and transfer their balance from old (deprecated) ECDSA based addresses to new addresses.

Now this assumes there is sufficient time but the history of cryptographic breaks has been slow with the time from theoretical flaw to real world exploit measures in multiples years (often decade or more).

5857  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Neighbor says bitcoin is a ponzi scheme on: June 26, 2013, 02:09:06 AM
I still don't know what it means. I could use google, but for the sake of conversation, I'll wait for an answer here

really you googled "ponzi scheme" and nothing useful came up.  Like maybe wikipedia article explaining the concept of a ponzi scheme in the first post.

Maybe you don't know how to use google.  I rarely do this but LMGTFY

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ponzi+scheme
5858  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Neighbor says bitcoin is a ponzi scheme on: June 26, 2013, 01:24:05 AM
What exactly does he mean?

He means he calls anything he doesn't understand a ponzi scheme.

Bitcoin may be many things.  It may be horribly flawed, it may be naively optimistic, it may never gain more than a marginal niche, hell it may crash and burn spectacularly tomorrow but it certainly isn't a ponzi scheme.

Let him know the ECB (no friend to Bitcoin) said as much in their report on virtual currencies.  Actually no regulator, governmental agency, or consumer watchdog group has stated Bitcoin is a ponzi.
5859  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: Bitcoin Foundation receives cease and desist order from California on: June 26, 2013, 01:18:51 AM

Then you have aspects like the $10 Silver coin having about $6 worth of Silver at the time of minting.  Everyone at every level got very large cuts of the profits.  Ultimately it was unsuspecting consumers who got $6 in Silver instead of $10 in FRN.


That's a completely irrelevant argument. There is no such thing as circulating coinage that has a metal content equal to the face value. If it did, it wouldn't circulate for long as people will take them out of circulation for the melt value.

.25 quarters contain only ~4 cents of metal

.05 nickels contain only ~4 cents of metal

.10 dimes = ~1.5 cents (about a 700% markup!)

Pennies from 1982 and earlier are worth about 2 cents each, and are slowly being taken out of circulation exactly for that reason.

Well at one time the dollar had "one dollar" (which is a unit of weight) of gold.  It was either a dollars worth of gold in the coin itself or the paper note could be redeemed for a dollar.  Liberty claimed selling point is that it was backed by silver.  If it merely is a fiat currency sold over face value to the profit of issuers well in many respects it was worse than the federal reserve note.

I think we can just agree to disagree.  I read the states evidence and it is pretty damming.  Ultimately that is why we have juries.  Is it possible they had no intent to counterfeit (which doesn't mean produce an exact replica it means passing currency off as legal tender)?  Certainly however looking at the evidence if I was on the jury I likely would have sided the same way.

This will be my last post to avoid derailing this thread further.  Feel free to have the last word ....

5860  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: How does the bitcoin client verify that an address has enough coins... on: June 26, 2013, 01:13:55 AM
...for the transaction it is a part of (assuming it is the input)?

Does it have to look through the entire block chain to find every instance of that address and see what has been sent to it and what has been taken out of it?  If so, man is that going to get processor intensive in the future?  It can't be the case but I can't find out how this is accomplished anywhere.

Addresses don't have coins.  Bitcoin works on the concept of outputs.  The input of all transactions is the output of a prior one.  The transaction ID of the output being spent is part of the transaction.  The bitcoin network simply looks up the transaction and verifies that it hasn't been spent before.

Your wallet doesn't need to do any checking to see "how much is taken out" because an output can only have two states.  Spent or unspent.  The client keeps a set of all unspent outputs (which is generally significantly smaller than the entire blockchain) called the UXTO.  It can quickly look for outputs to your addresses there and take the sum of those outputs.

When your wallet says "you have 13 BTC" what it means it "I have searched the UXTO and found a number of unspent outputs to addresses for which I have the private key, the sum of those unspent outputs is 13 BTC".

The efficiency of the verification of transactions and the computation of wallet value depends not on the blockchain but on the size of the UXTO.  This generally increases linearly with the number of users.   This is one reason why things like preventing uneconomical dust are important.   If the value of an output is less than the cost to spend it, it won't be spent and thus it will remain in the UXTO.  This reduces the efficiency of all nodes.
Pages: « 1 ... 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 [293] 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 ... 800 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!