Bitcoin Forum
March 05, 2015, 06:32:38 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.10.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ... 367 »
341  Other / Politics & Society / Re: US health care mandate (Obamacare) on: December 10, 2013, 02:10:04 AM
I don't know, since the US has done this pretty much consistly for 100 years, but we don't have a 'right' to healthcare.
If you pay taxes, why wouldn't you have a right to healthcare?

Taxes are supposed to be for infrastructure and defense, not individual needs.  Do you have a right to food?  Would food insurance, subsidized by your taxes, be a good idea?
342  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Is anybody working on pruning on the main client? on: December 09, 2013, 09:32:25 PM
What is on the agenda here, forcing most of the nodes to switch into SPV mode - this is an indirect attack on the decentralization, which is an extremely important property of this currency and a major factor in its market value.

You can pretend having a good intentions, but your objective is clearly hostile.

Bitcoin was never intended to run on every user's machine.  Absolute decentralization isn't a requirement, and it's long been expected that Bitcoin will scale as much as it needs to scale, and will naturally centralize as much as it needs to do accomplish that scaling.  That said, SPV mode & pruning are both among the early plans to reduce the need for this as much as is reasonable.  There is no doubt that the whole blockchain will persist somewhere, and that this is more likely to be done by an institution for many reasons. 
343  Other / Politics & Society / Re: US health care mandate (Obamacare) on: December 09, 2013, 09:23:23 PM
lol what sort of fucked up country doesn't provide healthcare for the poor and sick?

I don't know, since the US has done this pretty much consistly for 100 years, but we don't have a 'right' to healthcare.
344  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin "bumper sticker" mottos on: December 09, 2013, 03:31:31 PM
Oooh, I love this. Hope nobody minds if I do make a sticker or two out of these.

Dude, that is literally the point.
345  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? on: December 09, 2013, 02:51:05 PM
Who is John Galt?

An electrical engineer, reportedly.
346  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? on: December 08, 2013, 02:19:42 PM

Interesting. That IP address wouldn't be 192.168.0.1 per chance?

No, its not that one.

It was a trick question, the entire set of addresses that start with 192.168.x.x are part of a reserved block of addresses for a class C intranet.  There are no Internet providers that use that subnet.
347  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin decentrilization myth on: December 08, 2013, 02:11:22 PM
There is no minimum amount of hashes that one needs to produce to contribute to Bitcoin mining. It's totally parallelizable.

Nobody is going to run a machine for a few cents or dollars, or run at a lose of electricity cost. Even if they run a small unit just to sort the network,  their 10gh is nothing compared to THs and PHs large miners will deploy so end of the day, your small miner becomes smaller and smaller share of the network.



I'm doing it right now, because I need heat in my basement anyway, and electric service is 7.5 cents per KWH where I live.  That's about the same as the cost of propane, which is my other choice.  So why not, since I have the rig?

Can't compare us to the rest of the population, who will never run a miner.


We don't need everyone to run miners.

Quote
Secondly you running that 1 rig doesnt matter. As the network grows your share of the network decreases for people to keep it decentralized they need to keep adding hash as the network grows. The big guys will keep getting bigger while the small will get smaller.


So?  Do you think that wasn't foreseen?

EDIT: When we say that Bitcoin is decentralized, we mean that the network has no 'center'.  There is no node with more authority than others.  Massive mining centers could be shut down by fedco, but so what?
348  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin decentrilization myth on: December 08, 2013, 05:43:22 AM
There is no minimum amount of hashes that one needs to produce to contribute to Bitcoin mining. It's totally parallelizable.

Nobody is going to run a machine for a few cents or dollars, or run at a lose of electricity cost. Even if they run a small unit just to sort the network,  their 10gh is nothing compared to THs and PHs large miners will deploy so end of the day, your small miner becomes smaller and smaller share of the network.



I'm doing it right now, because I need heat in my basement anyway, and electric service is 7.5 cents per KWH where I live.  That's about the same as the cost of propane, which is my other choice.  So why not, since I have the rig?
349  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? on: December 08, 2013, 05:38:37 AM

Cryptocurrency and its derivatives are out of the bag now. First nation state to claim the lion's share in its control will benefit handsomely, just as those who took the lion's share in taming and keeping tabs on good part of the internet has profited from that venture.


Then it's China, because the US government doesn't stand to benefit regardless, since it will lose the trade advantages that come with being the one entity that can issue the international reserve currency.
350  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? on: December 08, 2013, 03:39:03 AM
Satoshi is from the UK and I think I know where he lives, here are the reasons why:

The first American settlers stuck two fingers up at the British establishment by removing silent letters from perfectly good words. So I still have to keep changing the default spell check language in Word from American English to British English. Microsoft have no incentive for fixing this problem, so it's something you have to get used to doing every now and then.

That's what got me thinking about Satoshi's country of origin. His/Her/Their 2009 paper uses the word 'favour' and not 'fovor'.

The original p2p network, now the internet, well that was Sir Tim Berners Lee, another Brit. So p2p at the game changing level is something of a national sport.

But then there are the actors in the software scenario testing and development - Alice and Bob. Typical British names, but we are still light years away from a smoking gun. But who in Japan uses Alice and Bob when trying to figure out the bad actors out there and how they might try and attack Bitcoin code? That strikes a blow for Japan being the mother of bitcoin invention.

Then there is the first IP address used to send a bitcoin transaction. Yes BTC was first seen as involving the movement of value over IP.

Alice was sent 9.95 of something at 11.45pm on 3 January 2009 (American's use January 3, 2009, so not a Yank) by Bob for order #12345. Her IP address started with 192.168........ I could tell you the rest, but then I would have to kill you. It seems that this early use IP address is still in use somewhere in England (i.e. Not Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland), but this time by a little chap who likes gaming and has created a server for his friends with this address.

Now the IP address could indeed be random. But if you are alpha testing, you might want to check that transactions are working, so would you use a random address, in a system originally designed to use IP addresses as well as block codes? Was the advent of anonymity a later step in the original development process?

Or, did Satoshi have a little kid who is now a teenage gaming geek? Maybe, the property with this IP address is owned by a different family.

Either way, my bet is that Satoshi is English, as many others have pointed out based on times of posts and use of grammar.

This would indeed make sense, all the great inventors are from the UK (let the abuse begin Grin), its something to do with the water.


Interesting. That IP address wouldn't be 192.168.0.1 per chance?  Because that is the default internal address mask number for almost every wifi router in the world, and just means that Satoshi was testing out the Send-to-IP function on an internal network, or even within his own GNU/Linux machine. 
351  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? on: December 07, 2013, 07:40:00 AM
Go to mtgox and you will find Nakamoto.

The top bitcoin exchanger is in Japan and a japanese man created bitcoin

Go there and you will find him

You, literally, have no idea of what you speak.
352  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Is anybody working on pruning on the main client? on: December 07, 2013, 02:03:20 AM
Other than that supposedly bitcoind already can prune, but it is not really exposed out of fear that there might be too many people actually doing it which would hurt chain distribution.

Can you point me to more details about this?  I'm having trouble finding it with the search functions.
353  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Why OFF-CHAIN transactions are not the solution on: December 07, 2013, 01:31:53 AM

But wait, isn't that exactly the same as Paypal? Where are the benefits then? What is the difference?



One difference is that there would be dozens, if not hundreds, of bitcoin services to choose from.  Consumer choice is never a bad thing.  Another difference is that we all have the choice to run our own node if it means that much to us.

Quote
Furthermore, Off-chain transaction also means that these private companies will be able to change ther rules.

No it would not.

Quote
Finally, what would happen if one of those services gets hacked and all their funds stolen. What would this say about the security of Bitcoin?


That already happened, to Mybitcoin.com.  Fortunes were lost, but it was an inditment against Mybitcoin.com's security model, not Bitcoin's.
Quote
Paypal uses Fiat and they can't be robbed because they are insured and whatever bank would reverse the thief's transaction. But this is not possible with Bitcoin, which would eventually mean that using a Bitcoin Payment processor is considerably more dangerous than using Fiat payment processors. And since Offchain transactions would be the norm, we would be forced to use them.

No we would not.  The only reason that such wallet services would even be viable businesses is if it's generally cheaper to use such services than pay a normal network transaction fee.  But there would be any number of ways to avoid such fees, not just the paypal-like bitcoin walet service model.  Another that I think would be viable is a Ripple-like overlay network.  Another woudl be something similar to what Electrum does with their Stratum overlay network.

Quote
I seriously don't see this proposed solution doing any good.

What alternatives do we have?

The Bitcoin community is made up of some of the most brilliant minds in the world. Are you really telling me that we can't find a solution to compress the information on the ledger enough so that a healhy amount of full-nodes always exists?


Of course we can, more than one in fact.  But the economic drivers for users to favor services has less to do with the size of the blockchain, and more to do with expected future transaction costs.  Currently, transaction fees are being heavily subsidized by block rewards, but future network congestion is bound to force that fee up.  The developers are still working on methods of streamlining the network, but at some transaction volume in the future, fees are going to have to total $25K per block to maintain the current level of security.  Ideally, we can improve the netowrk's throughput so that the costs are spread across many feee paying transactions, but Visa's average throughput is about 2K TPS, or about 1.2 Million transactions per block, which put the cost per transaction at less than 3 cents each.  But if we can't get there, something is going to have to give, because users aren't going to suddenly start paying GAvin's Cost (about 3.3 millibiitcoins per kilobyte) if they can avoid it, and they can avoid it if some portion of their transactions can be done off-network.
Quote
Bitcoin is based on consensus, which also means that we can change the code on consensus and even change the way the Blockchain is stored, making it smaller and allowing for increased scalability. We could even tell the software to read / write the blockchain in one way before block X and in a different compressed way after block X.


Compression of the blockchain is impossible, but there is another solution....
Quote
1. Pruning the Blockchain

I don't know exactly how pruning works and if it will solve this problem, because I've also read that some full-full nodes would be necessary with pruning. But still, that seems to be a better option than off-chain transactions.


Completely full nodes without pruning of any kind will not be neccessary per se, but I'd expect that some institutions would want to do it.  As for bootstrapping a new client after pruning is the default state, the client could simply be programmed to download the block headers (which are persistant data tha must exist anyway) up until some known block number, and so long as that known block number has a hash that matches the hash that the node has been programmed to expect, and that the whole set of block headers have  a single hash that the node has been programmed to expect, that client could treat that special block number as it's own genesis block from that point.  After all, users normally create a new wallet'dat file at that point, and it would be strange to need the blocks that existed prior to that point unless you were mining.

Quote

2. Creating a Masterblock

Bitcoin works on consensus. If on consensus we can decide the size of the blockchain and the transaction fee, on consensus we could certainly also decide that Block X with hash X is to become the new Origin block.


This is similar to what I described above, but no network consensus about which block is required.  That special block can be updated with each realease of a client, and be differant for each indepenantly maintained client.

Quote

We take all unspent inputs previous to a certain date and collect them in a Masterblock which is to become the new origin. Aftewards let the blockchain grow considerably longer so that the masterblock is stuck in between the regular chain and impossible to change even with an incredibly large amount of hashing power. Then, after a certain update, we decide on consensus that everything prior to the Masterblock does not need to be downloaded.


Unnecessary.
354  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Is anybody working on pruning on the main client? on: December 07, 2013, 12:48:37 AM
Just curious, because I've been getting a lot more questions about the resident size of the blockchain.
355  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What does the bible say about Bitcoin? on: December 06, 2013, 10:31:45 PM
Oh, and thank you and the rest of the mods for ignoring me. Without that complacency I would have been gone long ago.

That wasn't complacency, that was willful restraint. 
356  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What does the bible say about Bitcoin? on: December 06, 2013, 06:36:57 PM
No, Bitcoin doesn't have to be the mark in it's current form. The successor to Bitcoin could be. Come on Moonshadow, you know coercion will be a part of it just as coercion through groupthink is used on this forum to steer non believers into the gospel/doctrine of Bitcoin.


Peer pressure, whatever you call it, is not coercion.  Coercion is the use of force, as in enforcement of monetary laws.  The general opinion of a (largely) anonymous forum, whether or not you agree with that "groupthink" (it's called Bitcointalk, after all.  There's obviously a bias.), is not force.  All they can do is ignore your commentary.  Which happens to be what most of us do to you, Question.

Quote


 Control of commerce has been relevant to every government since the dawn of man it's not specific to the ancient Roman Empire.


That's the great innovation of bitcoin, as mass adoption of bitcoin would make government control of commerce much more difficult than it already is.  That is no small thing.

Quote

 I don't believe any of this bullshit either but I bet there are tens of thousands of Christians that I could convince. You are a unique believer in that you are not swayed by every wind of doctrine and don't take the sermon from the pulpit literally. Many do.

Oh, I know that.  A great many of those same people consider me a heretic as well.
357  Economy / Economics / Re: the huge Problem that most people doesn't really understand on: December 06, 2013, 06:13:28 PM
When you start wondering about what AnonyMint really thinks , you're on the path to madness Smiley

The truth here scares me.
358  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? on: December 06, 2013, 05:48:24 PM
I know I really shouldn't be doing this, but....

http://iang.org/papers/fc7.html

I wonder if anyone has bothered to ask Ian Grigg if he is, or has knowledge of, Satoshi Nakamoto.  It seems obvious to me that Satoshi must have read his works, at a minimum.

did Satoshi cite him in the whitepaper? is it plagiarism to reuse your own thoughts in a later work? some argue yes Smiley

Plagiarism is an impossibility in a libertarian worldview.  It might be polite to cite this paper, but it's not a crime to fail to do so.
359  Economy / Economics / Re: the huge Problem that most people doesn't really understand on: December 06, 2013, 05:46:17 PM
As long as you're working or earning money in some form, your salary should adjust for inflation so an annual rate of inflation of 3% or whatnot shouldn't be a problem. Of course, you also don't want to hold all your money in a savings account or your checking account, that's why it's a good idea to invest in a portfolio of stocks and bonds. Historical returns of these assets have outpaced inflation considerably, even if it misses the mark on the occasional year or two. If people are unable to save any money throughout a lifetime of working, then I'm sorry, but it's not the fault of inflation. It's a matter of personal saving.

that is the exact horse shit I am talking about, take time and think about it, they keep doing the same shit over and over and all over again, prices goes up 10% and they raise the minimum wage 3% to give you the illusion that they are fixing problems....

Minimum wage is part of the problem.

Fixing the fast-food strike

Monetary debasement is both necessary and good.

You are clueless and I am not going to explain it.

AnonyMint, you are a strange jumble of correct and false.  I wonder how both Austrian and Keynesian economic theories can co-exist in your head without your head exploding from the cognative dissonance.
360  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What does the bible say about Bitcoin? on: December 06, 2013, 05:41:57 PM
I do agree with you that even Christians shouldn't take the bible literally. If you want to use it as a group of parables to help you make sound moral decisions that is less damaging than what people actually use it for in most circumstances. Religions that are used to pass judgment on the lifestyle of others are as dangerous to me as a dictator poised for war. Just as many lives have been destroyed or ended with religion.

I didn't say that I don't take any part of it literally. 

Quote
In order to have Bitcoin fit into the role of the one world financial system it does not have to currently be an involuntary system. All it needs to be is a system that unifies the world under one monetary system. It can be perverted into an involuntary system once it's in place and the beast rises to power. Or perhaps it can be the training exercise necessary to teach the world how to use a one world financial system and be replaced with something similar in the near future.  

Since that is an impossibility without coercion, the rest is irrelevent.  Bitcoin cannot be the mark; and as I already mentioned, I don't even condsider "the mark" to be an actual prophesy, so the interpretation regarding control of commerce (which was very relevent to the Roman Empire during the first century A.D.) is not relevent to Bitcoin, the United Nations, or the United States Federal Reserve.  It's Daniel that predicts the (repeated) rise of Israel as a nation with actual borders, and Enoch perhaps as well (in the prophesy of the ages of humanity).  I don't consider actual prophesy to be at all common, and it should be suspect (even th ebible itself says this) but I don't consider prophesy to be impossible either.  Of course, those same prophesies (both in Daniel and Enoch) arent' very useful except in hindsight, as the only thing that they are really good for is establishing the (divine?) creditials of the author to a distant generation.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ... 367 »
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!