|
1
|
Economy / Service Discussion / Re: If you used Brainwallet.org - MUST READ! - Security Breach!
|
on: July 08, 2013, 01:31:36 PM
|
The issues is passphrase entropy or lack of entropy.
This +9000, I don't think the site is compromised. Some people probably have tables up and running monitoring all possible addresses created from basic to medium complex pass phrases. Tbh I would not be surprised if the creator of the site is one of them. * Insu Dra runs off to create a new vps for his new rainbow tables .... |
|
|
|
|
2
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How to save Bitcoin
|
on: July 05, 2013, 09:49:55 AM
|
I don't believe bitcoin needs saving but I'l play along. So my advice is: Try to engage as many people in buying Bitcoins as possible so the bankers/forex traders would have less and less power over this amazing currency.
Isn't that what silver stackers tried to do, "Buy silver, crash JP Morgan" ? Lesson learned there should be that you can't win when the opponent has a endless supply of cash at zero cost (aka big banks loan at 0% interest) to counter your buying frenzy ... |
|
|
|
|
3
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How did Satoshi Program for Incentive to Spend?
|
on: July 04, 2013, 07:06:33 PM
|
|
To get back on topic: No!
The opposite is true, the deflationary nature of bitcoin stimulates saving, just like gold and silver it rewards people for creating a certain degree of scarcity.
Bitcoin is the same as fiat when it comes to wealth distribution, people that have to little will have to spend/consume everything they get to survive and the happy few that have to match will keep on hoarding to inflate there holdings. This results in increasing scarcity and it will keep pushing the gap until the divide is so large that people no longer want to use fiat/bitcoin, at that point there true value will be known. It happened before, it is happening now and it will happen again ...
That said, bitcoin was not designed to solve the growing gap between wealthy and poor people. It was designed to create freedom in a very closed aspect of our society (money), it was designed to protect the freedom of people to take there money and do what ever they want and where ever they want to do it. Even more important is that it was designed to stop banks and/or governments from taking your money just because they believe that’s the best way to solve the crisis we are in!
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Boycott 0.8.2
|
on: June 26, 2013, 11:57:44 AM
|
Your missing the point of 0.8.2 boycott, ofc 0.8.3 contains the changes made in 0.8.2, the same changes he wanted to boycott in first place ... |
|
|
|
|
7
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Sick of surveillance
|
on: June 26, 2013, 06:53:24 AM
|
bull shit. they retain everyones data indefinitely anyway regardless of whether the person is using encryption. so they use your data as an input in their research to learn how to break the encryption? big deal if you dont encrypt they just read it with out even having to attempt to break anything. this sounds like a really bad bluff to me. they know they wont be able to break encryption for some time so they are trying to scare people into not using it. This argument is synonymous to the argument that if everyone leaves their front door open, a burglar is less likely to choose your house. I agree with pythonista that we must have wide adoption of crypto.
Cryptography may not guarantee privacy but it protects work/messages from entities that can make allegations that aren't true.
Two quotes say it all, the article linked is just euh .... aiming at mind boggling stupidity and/or ignorance. |
|
|
|
|
8
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Sick of surveillance
|
on: June 24, 2013, 11:15:06 AM
|
I am a fan for initiatives like these but keep in mind that crypto does not guarantee privacy.
I would take that even further, crypto offers no privacy at all. It hides content but leaves all the meta data intact, by hiding the content it does make the meta data less useful and harder to identify/link. Even if this would be broken in 10-20 years it does not mean we should be making it easy for them today ... The only reason this did not happen so far is that there is little money to be made, even the opposite being able to data-mine is very profitable for corporations like google, amazon, .... (*cough* ubuntu/Canonical). On the other hand you have convenience, people pick convenience over privacy not because they don't care (as most will tell you) but because they are to *lazy* to use/learn the complex systems required to add the extra privacy. |
|
|
|
|
9
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Sick of surveillance
|
on: June 23, 2013, 06:14:03 AM
|
|
Tbh to break the surveillance you will need to tackle the problem at a lower and broader level, a simple device that people buy might make it easier for users it still leaves to meany open holes or has to limit users to other device users. What you end up with is a subset of people like tor, freenode, .... while the majority of people still use the open net.
I have been looking at this for some time now but simply don't have time/money (and to some degree skills) to complete it.
The idea in my mind is to have every communication on the net to use public key encryption (and with every communication I mean every packet send over the wire), the major hurdle there is the that you need to get that public key to the other side without people intercepting and replacing it, aka the man in the middle. What meany people don't realize is that with bitcoin and namecoin we have the perfect solution to this problem, a key/value store that is distributed and secured, the only thing left is to tie this all together. Bitmessage is a perfect example of this ... but still limited. To make this more global and easy to use I'm working on domain names and id's in namecoin, think of it as dns/http/ssl v2.0.
Bob (Browser, Email, Chat, ...) looks up domain and/or id in the blockchain to get the public key, he then tries to communicate with Alice (server, peer client, ...) using that key and provides his id in the handshake message. Alice looks for the id she got from bob in the blockchain and send a encrypted reply with the pulblic key she got as a result. They are communicating on a encrypted channel without a direct exchange of key's, there was not a single unencrypted message between bob and alice! Sins a attacker can't forge the blockchain and has no idea where or how they perform the lookup the whole system becomes very resistant to a man in the middle attack.
The tools are out there all it takes is time and skill to make user friendly applications and infrastructure that implement this and we could end up with a new internet where all communication is based on public key encryption. On top of that we would get rid of centralized dns/ssl systems used to censor and spy on meany of the sites that threaten the status quo today (wikileaks, piratebay, liberty reserve, ...).
If that is done, specialized devises to promote the use dns/http/ssl v2.0 would be a very good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: difficulty estimated down?
|
on: June 19, 2013, 09:26:15 PM
|
Jes but... Why this drop?
Less hashing power on the network = lower network difficulty I think he means what happened to asicminer hashing power where did the blades go to ? did they break ? did he sell some off ? |
|
|
|
|
11
|
Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: difficulty estimated down?
|
on: June 19, 2013, 02:11:54 PM
|
Network hashrate dropped considerably, primarily due to a huge drop from ASICMiner (see: http://www.asicminercharts.com/). It is silly to assume that the current drop is due to GPU miners shutting their rigs down. If that would happen, we would see a very gradual decrease as there is no secret conspiracy to shut down GPU mining en-masse at the same data. You'd see areas with high electricity costs shut down first, followed by more and more areas with each difficulty increase. There haven't been these huge drops in network hashrate with previous difficulty adjustments. That explains idd. and yes I don't buy GPU's switching ether, on top of what you said there hash power percentage wise is just to small to make a impact at this point. Especially with new asic's being delivered every day for past weeks ... *damm I was so hoping for a tinfoil hat discussion about bfl and avalon  * |
|
|
|
|
15
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / 100k+ New Startup attempts in bitcoin ? (coursera.org)
|
on: June 18, 2013, 07:58:45 AM
|
So today a new course started on coursera.org, they claim to have 100k+ people participating, including me. Little did I know the goal of the course would be to build a bitcoin based crowd funding website for your startup. Part of your grade will be based on how meany bitcoins your project raised. If there claim off 100k+ is true and just 1% of these make it to the final project that’s still a big number. So all be ready to see a huge amount of new projects popup and people asking for your beloved btc. https://www.coursera.org/course/startupThere must be some sing ups that read this forum or new people coming on to these forums. My goal has to do with domain names, namecoin and pgp ... more to come on that. Are you one of them ? If you are what is your startup about ? |
|
|
|
|
18
|
Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: Tarnished image
|
on: June 16, 2013, 05:51:24 AM
|
I really like your analogy, here in Central South Australia there are lots of isolated, heavily guarded, gold mines, where mining companies have invested hundreds of millions of dollars to extract Gold and Silver Copper and other minerals, I liken them to the ASIC miners for BTC., (btw, they provide lots of employent in the meantime, plus royalty cheques for the local landowners) every one benefits, including the economy.
Meantime there's old mate in Central Victoria, who makes a very nice living panning for Gold, and has done so for years, problem is, he's the only one that benefits, not even his family as he's a single bloke, I liken him to a GPU miner.
Reminds me of a movie: Oliver said "Please sir can I have bit more ?" ... Tarnished Image - Bitcoin Promotion:* Anonymous: Fail, at best it's pseudo, but with current generation of exchanges even that's gone. (at least for masses) * Decentralized: Fail, with pools the power ends up in hands of few ... * Micro Transactions: Fail, with anti dust changes micro transaction will be unprofitable. * Everyone can participate (vote): Fail, you need to buy specialized hardware to have a chance. With every chance we had to improve some of these key benefits the exact opposite happened as a result key benefits are being removed one by one. Whats next ? I don't know ... |
|
|
|
|
19
|
Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: Tarnished image
|
on: June 16, 2013, 04:47:25 AM
|
Let's use an analogy to see clearly what's going on.
Imagine a large gold vein is discovered in a nearby mountainside. At first the gold is so plentiful that anyone can get in with nothing more than a pie pan and pan for gold (CPU mining for BTC), and make a profit doing so. People see these other people mining the cheap and easy gold and jump in, but the cheap and easy gold starts to go away, and mining becomes more difficult. Mining with a cheap pie pan isn't worth it anymore, so some people quit, while others buy more expensive equipment, say a sluice or dredge and get to work obtaining the more-difficult-to-mine gold (GPU mining for BTC). As more and more gold is mined, eventually even this equipment doesn't get you much, and now folks either have to buy more expensive equipment to mine the gold, or quit. Some people invest in large scale mining plants to get the difficult-to-mine gold (ASIC mining for BTC), while those with pie pans complain that it's too hostile for new miners to make any profit. They have no right to complain, the time of easy pickings is gone. Does this mean that gold will cease being a valuable currency? No, it just means you either have to invest real money into machines that can mine profitably, or don't mine at all and just buy BTC outright.
I really like your analogy, here in Central South Australia there are lots of isolated, heavily guarded, gold mines, where mining companies have invested hundreds of millions of dollars to extract Gold and Silver Copper and other minerals, I liken them to the ASIC miners for BTC., (btw, they provide lots of employent in the meantime, plus royalty cheques for the local landowners) every one benefits, including the economy. Meantime there's old mate in Central Victoria, who makes a very nice living panning for Gold, and has done so for years, problem is, he's the only one that benefits, not even his family as he's a single bloke, I liken him to a GPU miner. To my mind the ASIC miners are an integral part of BTC, without them BTC will founder and if you follow the block chain to its logical conclusion, eventually, (not in my lifetime) the only return the miners will get is the transaction fees. Sure the big miners make huge profits, but in the meantime everyone benefits, no doubt several people will tell me this is not a good thing, but then I'm not an economist, but ever the optimist. Like the central banks of today right? Is it not that the reason why bitcoin was created to combat that very thing? So why are we mining a decentralized currency? Exactly, just like central banks or even political parties both want us to believe wealth will trickle down (we should know better by now) ... Don't like a pool go mine on other pool ... That is like telling a us citizen to go vote for 3the party ... and like they experienced in Belgium, if that third party ever gets a big vote count the others will just ban together to keep them out ... Decentralized my ass, Just like current democratic political/economical system, It was a nice concept but it failed. (or is failing/ slipping away) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
