Bitcoin Forum
October 18, 2021, 09:11:55 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 22.0 [Torrent]
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 »
1  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin is Worse is Better on: September 13, 2012, 07:48:16 PM
I'm beginning to see this too.  However, judging by the longevity of C, unix, windows, x86, html, php, etc... 'Worse' apparently really is 'Better'.  And this will not affect Bitcoin's survival.  It will however cause much grief and pain to everyone involved along the way.

What 'worse' has going for it is 'fast and easy', which is why it's successful.  We'd have had to wait another decade for a 'better' Bitcoin.  So we make due with what we have, and it entrenches itself (and we suffer later).
2  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Someone or some group is disturbed by Bitcoin. Vandalism on Wikipedia. on: September 13, 2012, 07:24:39 PM
Tell me, why are people so bothered by Bitcoin now?

These people hate Bitcoin for the same reasons they hate gold, Ayn Rand, Ron Paul, and libertarians.

They know they are second-handers.  They know they are parasitic leeches.  They know they are useless tax eaters, living off the productivity of virtuous rational value holders.

They hate anything and anyone that threatens to dispel the illusion that they are moral, and superior to their betters via the sanction of the victim and death worship of altruism.

They know their time is limited, and the day of reckoning draws nigh.  They know they will perish when the IRS agents' US dollar paychecks cease and the welfare checks stop.

They hate this reality, and will strain with every misguided ounce gram of self-preservation to prevent or delay the inevitable.

They are ashamed of their own worthlessness, and have created this entire world order dedicated to hiding their shortcomings behind a tissue of lies and a wall of coercion.

This is awesome.

As for the OP, it's not even vandalism, it's Wikipedia working as intended.  The coterie running things over there kept Bitcoin off Wikipedia for a very long time (you might be able to google the record of that drama).

Things like the debate over global warming are purged, and Wikipedia presents one side of an argument as 'consensus'.  What Wikipedia's insistence on 'consensus' means is that only one view will ever be presented and the most aggressive group purges all dissent.  And the most aggressive group over there is an authoritarian left-wing - that hates sound money.  Knowledge is power and their goal is to limit and shape everyone else's.  NPOV is of course totally Orwellian, they've simply declared their POV as 'neutral'.
3  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Verified Warnings From Former U.S. Presidents About “Invisible Government” on: September 05, 2012, 12:26:23 PM
FDR, Hoover, Wilson... Wilson who got the US into WW1 and violently suppressed dissent against a war that had no benefit for the US.  FDR, the New Deal guy, that FDR?

Yeah there's a conspiracy: them!  You're listening to stories about boogeymen from the people that conned Americans of their freedom.
4  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: testnet3 peer IP's on: September 04, 2012, 11:12:54 PM
Have you set irc=0 or listen=0 ?  I checked and there are a couple of listening hosts on IRC right now. So it should work for you.

Thanks. I was using proxy, which automatically disables listen, which automatically disables irc.
5  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / testnet3 peer IP's on: September 04, 2012, 06:59:35 PM
So the bitcoin with testnet3 can't find any peers.  Are there nodes I can add manually?
6  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Survey: gauging community opinion regarding criminal transactions on: September 02, 2012, 06:26:05 PM
Yup, I agree. Also, I think it's worth mentioning, in an ideal world, a lot of legislation and policy making should be made based on academic research, which is why so much money is invested. Personally, I believe academic research into Bitcoin is a "must" for it to be accepted as a currency.

A "must"?  Bitcoin is already accepted as a currency!  The services of normative academia are not required.

So in your 'ideal world', you are the de facto ruling class. Nice.
7  Economy / Speculation / Re: if bitcoin only served the "underground" economy... on: September 01, 2012, 06:27:10 PM
could it still reach those incredible highs of $1000/btc and beyond, in some years?

It will get there in about 50 years even with zero growth in the bitcoin economy.
8  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Keep getting "Transaction creation failed" on: August 30, 2012, 06:06:37 PM
I have a similar issue, and I don't think it is a transaction complexity problem.  I have an address with a single transaction that I cannot send coins from. 
In my case, I have a block reward from solo mining that caused my Bitcoin client to crash in May, when I first tried to spend it.  Shortly afterward, the client would crash or close every time it tried to open the wallet.  I used pywallet to extract the private keys for that address and other addresses with coins.  I was successful in importing the private keys and spending coins from all other addresses. 

Here's what is strange.  If I import the private key in a unencrypted wallet, the Bitcoin client crashes when it tries to open the wallet.  If I import the private key in an encrypted wallet, the Bitcoin client shows the coins in the wallet.  However, if I try to send them, I get "Transaction creation failed".  I have also tried several releases (from 0.3x to 0.7RC1) with no luck.

I've heard there is an issue with some addresses created on earlier clients and encrypted with newer client releases.  I didn't hear back from Gavin (he's excused if he's been busy Smiley)   I think I'll ping him again to clarify if there is a known issue.

Did I read somewhere that mtgox will let you import private keys?  You could try that, see if that works... or you crash them.
9  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Keep getting "Transaction creation failed" on: August 30, 2012, 04:55:47 PM
1. Do I have some way to influence which inputs are chosen?  For example, can I choose 10 "virgin" coins for a 500 BTC transaction, instead of thousands of 0.01xxx inputs?

2. Can I somehow view the details of my wallet?  I imagine that I could send the offending small inputs away to a different wallet, if I only knew their exact face value and the order in which they appear in the wallet.

3. Is there any other way to "clean" my wallet, or reorder the items in it so that the offending items will be selected last instead of first?

Some of the alternate clients provide 1 and 2.

3. unfortunately not exactly, the standard client has it's own way of selecting inputs.  I think there's a patch around that completely ignores small amounts, maybe there are more patches that do other things.
10  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Blockchain size, exponential growth? on: August 26, 2012, 04:39:49 PM
Isn't the block chain size growth hard coded to be linear?

10 mins per block, 1MB block size... scarily this is 52GB per year.

However, it is linear not exponential.

A 2TB drive, that's 40 years of block chain, so it's actually not that bad.
11  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: How bitcoins are spent from different addresses, official bitcoin client on: August 26, 2012, 02:26:32 PM
While in that case it probably will, you can't really rely on it.  It's some behind the scenes black magic.
12  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: coin selection vs low value spam: non-deterministic failure on: August 26, 2012, 01:00:35 PM
Isn't the implication here that you could destabilize a site by spamming them with low value transactions?  And increase their transaction fees when SelectCoins randomly picks up the low value inputs.
The attacker will pay transaction fees to send those spammy inputs, and that has been a large enough disincentive that it hasn't happened.

That said, SelectCoins aught to be improved; ideally, it should never include an input if the fee for adding that input is greater than that input's value.

Or maybe it should just ignore inputs below the 'spam transaction' threshold for now, as being more trouble than they're worth.

Anyways this was triggered by someone spamming the wallet with a very larger number of small transactions, of course I've always known this could be an issue but dealing with it is mostly a matter of money I didn't do anything about it.

I knew I saw that somewhere. That's an Intersango owner/dev I believe.

An end user's rational self-interest is total transaction fee minimization. I think this means that some approximation of total transaction fee minimization has to become the dominant coin selection method.

And the current coin selection solves some other problem. I think the way to look at it is this: you have some age-weighed inputs, some fee associated with a send from them, a discount rate that you are willing to trade a current transaction fee reduction for a future reduction, I suspect you might need estimates for average transaction size and time between transactions: the function to minimize would be the sum of discounted transaction fees, and in the absence of a clever solution, a stochastic/brute force/heuristic solution will do the job.

btw, I don't think a 'recent coin' premium can survive market forces. The miners who set the transaction fee, I assume will be constrained by block size, meaning that transaction size is the 'scarcity' that will determine fees. Which means that miners have an inventive to charge a linear fee per transaction size alone since coin age doesn't concern them (too much - I guess there is some risk premium for reversed spends).
13  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Bitcoin can no longer continue safely and will quit on: August 25, 2012, 08:31:14 PM
I am getting this on WIn7 x64 with my Bitcoin client. Latest bitcoin client.

Any way to fix this?


The database unfortunately seems to be fragile.  Backup the data directory (just in case), then delete everything except wallet.dat, and start over (or you could try selectively deleting the smallest files first).  Should be somewhere like C:\Users\yourusername\appdata\Bitcoin
14  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / coin selection vs low value spam: non-deterministic failure on: August 25, 2012, 08:20:48 PM
If I run this program (v 0.6.99 on a testnet3-box with about 200 BTC balance), it succeeds about 1500 times and then fails with 'Error: Transaction creation failed, code: -4'.

b = jsonrpc.ServiceProxy(...)
for i in xrange(100000):
    print i
    a = b.getnewaddress('')
    b.sendtoaddress(a, 0.00000001)

debug.log shows: 'SelectCoins() best subset: ...' trying to pick up a massive set of small inputs.

Increasing the send amount usually gets it working again, but decreasing it back either fails immediately or eventually.

Isn't the implication here that you could destabilize a site by spamming them with low value transactions?  And increase their transaction fees when SelectCoins randomly picks up the low value inputs.

I think the solution for the coin selection is to sort the inputs from least 'encumbered' to most 'encumbered' (the value-age heuristic used to calculate tx fees), and just pick the inputs off the top, spam would then never get touched.  Possibly see how many inputs from the most 'encumbered' end can be included without increasing the transaction fee (to slowly eat the spam).  Or some clever global optimization.

Either way I think coin selection probably has to minimize the current transaction fee.
15  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: How big of a return can you sustain? on: August 25, 2012, 12:23:30 PM
The lending sub-forum has people paying about 1% a week for deposits.
16  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Threats and countermeasures in buying real world things through the mail on: August 25, 2012, 11:54:32 AM
Hi there,

I've been following bitcoin for a while, and finally decided it was about time to get started with it. I do have a question about anonymity and threat models though, which I'm struggling to figure out myself.

Let's say I want to buy a banned book using bitcoins. I'm new to bitcoin, so I do the following:

1) Buy bitcoins using wire transfer from an exchange.
2) Transfer bitcoins from exchange to my wallet.
3) Buy the book from somewhere online place.
4) Get the book shipped to my house.

The threats that I see here all revolve around the seller getting busted. In this case, the attackers have:
- My postal address (from shipping it, presuming the seller kept logs)
- The address my bitcoins came from.

Am I correct in thinking that the attacker can also see the history of the transactions that passed through my wallet (as they now have the wallet address)? If so, presumably they could see that the bitcoins originated from an exchange, and subpoena the exchange.

The subpoena an exchange issue could be dealt with largely by depositing in cash, rather than wire transfer. That way the exchange need have little knowledge of my identity.

The postal address issue seems pretty intractable, to me. A PO Box would provide another layer of indirection, but is also a subpoena (or less in many countries) away from revealing my identity.

Anything I haven't thought of, or have thought of wrongly, or better ways of doing things?


The wallet tracking issue is solved by mixing your bitcoin with some large collection of bitcoin (or many of these to lessen the potential problem of records being kept), then withdrawing it to a new wallet.

I guess you could have things sent to a vacant house with an accessible mailbox.
17  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Fascism as an ideology. on: August 24, 2012, 05:49:14 PM
Isn't there a place in the world for a nation with strong leadership, a united culture and community? Should people be able to participate in fascism if they choose to do so?

A lot of international militarists seem to think that shouldn't be the case and foreign countries should be obligated to intervene in culturally-rigid, authoritarian nations.

Isn't it contradictory for fascists to want tolerance?
18  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Women and free market on: August 24, 2012, 03:53:21 PM
Women are inherently disadvantaged on a free market. Because they need to take breaks during pregnancies and the time after, women need more security and support. They also feel more connected and responsible for the newborn than men (who seem to "run away" more often than women) and thus have to bear more risk. Hence they are more "social" and are thus drawn to models of society many here would call "socialist".

The insensitivity of many libertarians and ancaps for this set of problems is one aspect that scares many "normal" folks (and leftists) away. I don't like the "big state" solution either, but the "free market" fails to resolve this. Also, women might complain that raising children is hard work, and an undoubtedly necessary service for society, but it is unrewarded by a market because what they do is taken for granted and the market cannot really provide a way to compensate them.

So until there is a satisfying solution for this, I predict we won't have libertarian/ancap "utopia".

The solution to this problem was invented thousands of years ago at the dawn of human civilization: marriage.  The real 'till death do us part' kind, not the current completely unenforced version.  Marriage is simply a voluntarily entered contract that solves exactly this problem.  And a libertarian/ancap 'utopia' would have no problem enforcing any custom marriage contract.

What happened is that the left decided that instead of a private solution to this they would destroy marriage to force a public solution, hence the big government nanny state.
19  Economy / Economics / Re: sudden drop in bitcoin value? on: August 22, 2012, 08:38:39 AM

20  Economy / Economics / Re: Bring your best economic jokes on: August 22, 2012, 08:06:10 AM
An economist and his friend are walking along, the friend says to the economist "look there's a $20 bill on the ground", the economist keeps walking without looking down and says "that's impossible, someone would have already picked it up".
Pages: [1] 2 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!