Ok so, say it was possible to send that as a single transaction (the ~.53 BTC), would that count as 1 transaction or as 53,000 transactions?
It would be possible if we had bigger blocks, maybe 10 MB or higher. However, right now it is not possible. It would count as a single TX (i.e. transaction) with ~53,000 inputs. You need to read up on inputs and outputs of a transaction to learn more. I suggest locking this thread now to avoid unnecessary replies. PM me if you have any more (or other) questions. I understand the bigger block thing, was just curious how it would be counted. That being said, the stress comes from people "picking apart" the 53,000 transactions (via coin control) trying to piece together enough to be worthwhile as well as stay under the current block size limit. Is that correct? I do need to read up on inputs/outputs. I never dedicated enough time to fully understanding it. thanks for the info
|
|
|
The public private keys to said address are now being made public and lots of people are all trying to import the keys and send the coins to their own addresses. Correct? How does this spam the network? is it by the sheer number of people trying to spend the same coins or is it by the number of transactions in each private key?
Okay I have corrected the first part for you. The problem isn't really in the number of people that are trying to spend the same coins, because transactions will get the 'conflicted' status (at least they did for me). It is because there are a LOT of inputs in the transactions that they're creating. Basically there was an address that had ~0.53 BTC on it. It had around 53 000 inputs, and to send all of that a transaction of around 7-8 MB is needed (or plethora of smaller ones). Basically because of the legal pressures Coinwallet stopped their plans and did not conduct the 'stress test'. However, by making so many keys private they are essentially making users do this for them. Ok so, say it was possible to send that as a single transaction (the ~.53 BTC), would that count as 1 transaction or as 53,000 transactions?
|
|
|
Thread for reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175321.0Its my understanding that a bunch of addresses were created and thousands of tiny transactions were sent to these addresses. The public keys to said address are now being made public and lots of people are all trying to import the keys and send the coins to their own addresses. Correct? How does this spam the network? is it by the sheer number of people trying to spend the same coins or is it by the number of transactions in each private key? Im thinking there are a few different pieces of this that all came together to allow this to happen and I dont know if I fully understand any of them.
|
|
|
Chances are, you would be wasting your time. There are very few CPU only coins and most (all?) are run by botnets and dumped for Bitcoin. Now, if you want to mine just to learn then go for it but dont expect to ever break even let alone make a profit.
GPU mining is almost in the same boat with the exception of a few coins.
What about XMG (magi)? Looks promising. It is a hybrid PoW/PoS coin. I've been mining a few with my quad core CPU and earned $0.10 running the PC for a full day (24hrs) Honestly I know nothing abuot that coin but doing some math will tell you its not profitable. If your computer is using 250 watts of power (I dont really know what it uses, you'll have to figure it out) and your electric costs $.10/kwh (average cost in the US) then you spent about $.60 to make $.10.
|
|
|
Chances are, you would be wasting your time. There are very few CPU only coins and most (all?) are run by botnets and dumped for Bitcoin. Now, if you want to mine just to learn then go for it but dont expect to ever break even let alone make a profit.
GPU mining is almost in the same boat with the exception of a few coins.
|
|
|
you can send one 0.000001 btc to any address and change the fees amount to the amount that you want to send to the miners like send 0.0000001 btc to someone random btc address with 0.50btc as fees, and miner gets the fees
But this is problmatic because the 1 satoshi ends up in the UTXO set so instead of cleaning up the dust, you're making even smaller dust and sending it to someone else. It may be better instead to make a transactions without any outputs (is this legal)? If the point is to clean up dust, you definitely want to figure out how to create something which actually acheives this. Couldnt you just hang onto the dust until you need to make a legit transaction, say to pay hosting or whatever for your service, and then just add the dust as the fee for that transaction? This will prevent the single satoshi to a random address issue and still send dust to the miners.
|
|
|
I also have Bitcoin Core in my laptop. From what I understand if I copy blockchain data from my laptop to my pc I don't need reindexing. Am I right? Thanks for your help DannyHamilton.
Yes, you should be able to simply copy it from another machine.
|
|
|
About 80-90% of my coins are in Bitcoin and Litecoin (more on the Litecoin side) and the rest are made up of a few alts that I played with over the years. Some I got stuck with, others I see (or saw) real potential in so Im holding onto them and even buying a few $ worth from time to time. Feathercoin and Primecoin are two that I think are different but have fallen to the side over the last year or so.
I think its not a bad idea to hold a few coins but I wouldnt go crazy with it. I wouldnt put a large percentage of your holding into an alt and I wouldnt try to pickup a large number of alts. However, at the end of the day its all a huge gamble and no one can really tell you the best thing to do. all you can do is jump in and hope for the best. Just remember to only invest with money you are willing to lose.
good luck!
|
|
|
Maintenance scheduled for SOLO pool today at 08:00 UTC, service will be unavailable for approximately 1h. Thank you for understanding.
Best regards, NiceHash team.
Still down? the graphs seem to have stopped yesterday (2015-08-26) at 18:45. Website has been responsive and I think the pool is up but graphs are not updating.
|
|
|
I buy a set amount every time I get a paycheck. Does not matter where ever the market is otherwise I end up over thinking it and end up not buying at all. Rather pull the trigger and hope for the best, I'm long on bitcoin anyways.
I do exactly the same. It might be a huge buy order but I buy weekly.
|
|
|
Awhile back I offered to sell a USB stick with the updated blockchain on it but I couldnt find a way to prove that it wasnt infected with virus or some wallet stealer. Here is the blockchain downloadable via torrent: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145386.0EDIT: after looking at the thread again it seems this is actually slower than letting the client sync... sorry
|
|
|
Franks Redhot is my favorite flavor of hot sauce but its not very spicy. Ive recently been trying pex peppers hot sauces which have a lot of heat and good taste as well. They also accept Bitcoin! pexpeppers.com PS, I do not work for nor am I affiliated with Pex...
|
|
|
Yes, just like you can have multiple bank accounts you can also have multiple bitcoin wallets.
|
|
|
Oh boy, here come the charts again. My personal fav. LMAO!! yeah, you all are reading into this way too much!
|
|
|
So? LTC is a bitcoin copy with a different name and logo... It's creator jumped ship long ago too.
Try again. Litecoins creator didnt jump ship and is still an active member of the community.
|
|
|
I have checked the config, its intact and correct.
No I am not mining with GPUs.
|
|
|
I used to solo mine with the older bitcoin wallet but now that Ive updated to 0.10.2.2 I can not. Nothing else was changed on the computer other than the updated Bitcoin Core. Was something changed with this version to disallow mining? I get an error about the username/password being wrong however it was not changed and I can confirm its correct.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
1999-2000 I think. I would have been 12-13 at the time. The system was an HP (families first computer) with a 466 Celeron, 256MB ram, a 20GB hard drive and a 56k soft modem. We would dial up at a blistering speed of 28.8kbps and on a good day, 32kbps. At some point I came across a hardware modem and using that I was able to get up to 46-48kbps.
Those were the days...
A 486 Celeron - those were the ones without the math co-processors, right?. Future Shop (the US know them as Best Buy) wanted an extra $500 for the stupid math co-processor to make it a DX instead of an SX. Remember those terms? lol 56k was the fastest dial up speed back then - created using a 28.8k modem and data compression! So far 1995 is the year to beat! Err, 466 was the speed, not model - my bad. http://ark.intel.com/products/42097/Intel-Celeron-Processor-466-MHz-128K-Cache-66-MHz-FSBI remember reading about people who would take multiple phone lines and modems and combine them to get faster connections. I always dreamed about doing that haha. It was probably around 2003-2005 when broadband starting to come into our area. My had a good friend at the local cable company (now Comcast). He gave us one of their test modems to use for a few months while they setup the network. It was uncapped and would hit 10mbps!! I had faster internet than anyone i knew at the time. After testing they knocked it down to 2-3mb i think.
|
|
|
1999-2000 I think. I would have been 12-13 at the time. The system was an HP (families first computer) with a 466 Celeron, 256MB ram, a 20GB hard drive and a 56k soft modem. We would dial up at a blistering speed of 28.8kbps and on a good day, 32kbps. At some point I came across a hardware modem and using that I was able to get up to 46-48kbps.
Those were the days...
|
|
|
|