Sure, now that this isn't in the technical forum anymore I shall unsubscribe because I have no interest in these topics.
I told I proposed a communication protocol and we need re-defne core's mandate. If you think that has not technical implications, you're lost. Not in the bitcoin forum. |
|
|
|
We finally have someone that is willing to discuss the macro-economic implications of bitcoin. Can everyone else (except theymos) stfu and just let dialogue open?
Sure, now that this isn't in the technical forum anymore I shall unsubscribe because I have no interest in these topics. |
|
|
|
Is there any forum or place for dialogue where the participants might be able to hold a candle to me in regard to the macro-economic implications of bitcoin? I'm done with this petty bullshit.
Probably not. By going through your post history here and on reddit I can see you are the second smartest man to have ever lived - close second to Nash. I suggest you start working on your proposal and come back when you have some actual code to show, because you are definitely the man for it. |
|
|
|
|
Since this is the development and technical discussion forum I'm still waiting for concrete technical proposals for what should be done. Otherwise this is in the wrong forum.
|
|
|
|
Putting aside what core devs can or cannot do, traincarswreck what concretely are you proposing they should do? Apart from them acknowledging bitcoin cannot be ideal money I have not seen any concrete proposals from your end.
Yes you have. Stop trying to make bitcoin ideal money cause its a stupid thing to try to do. It's NOT possible, anyone with any understanding of money and macro economics KNOWS this. Is there any scientists here that read source documents? Has anyone here read a book on economics? I can see why people are making fun of you. You keep saying the same stuff over and over and have either a serious problem with reading comprehension or are not even trying. |
|
|
|
|
Putting aside what core devs can or cannot do, traincarswreck what concretely are you proposing they should do? Apart from them acknowledging bitcoin cannot be ideal money I have not seen any concrete proposals from your end.
|
|
|
|
There is a roughly 1 in 2^128 chance (not worth worrying about) of a random 256 bit key not falling in this range.
What would happen to a wallet program if this happened?
The wallet should be checking that the keys generated are in that range. If it is not, then a new key should be generated and the first one discarded. Wouldn't everything still work but it would wrap around, basically becoming X - 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEBAAEDCE6AF48A03BBFD25E8CD0364141? At least that's what math tells us - if group order is n, then G^(n+x) = g^n * g^x = g^x. |
|
|
|
|
Create a new wallet, click on "restore a wallet", you will be prompted for the seed and that is it.
|
|
|
|
|
I think mycelium does everything that is needed by the average bitcoin user and then some. Just make sure you properly back it up - write the seed down and keep it in a safe place.
|
|
|
|
|
Why not use mycelium? The whole point of using electrum on android was that it was the first wallet working on android to have deterministically derived keys. Mycelium added that and is currently probably the most popular android wallet - I see no reason not to use it instead of electrum.
|
|
|
|
Judging by your post history you do not have the seed. Your only option is hoping you remember enough of the password for a service like https://walletrecoveryservices.com/ to crack it. Take this as a valuable lesson and next time (if there is a next time) properly back up your wallet. |
|
|
|
|
Thomas, would it be possible to update the installer with the patch that would allow an empty passphrase for the trezor wallet?
|
|
|
|
Is there anyway to get back the bitcoins in a locked wallet if I have the file? Someone please help!
Even if the passworld was weak, I don't think bruteforcing is a viable option. If he has some general idea of what the password was then it's a very viable option. Check http://www.walletrecoveryservices.com/. |
|
|
|
hacking bitcoin transaction can be possible,as i read before that last year, Hacking Team already mentioned that they’re working on a feature that could expose transactions related to bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Documents have shown that this feature can also expose transactions using litecoin, feathercoin, and namecoin.
source? |
|
|
|
The message encryption is not done by the elliptic curve when using ECIES,
conventional encryption such as AES is used for message encryption.
This is probably what gmaxwell is referring to. If AES is broken so is ECIES. In other words, the security of ECIES is dependent on the security of EC discrete logarithm problem as well as AES. |
|
|
|
In my imagination the additional code in the blockchain looks just like "1561BfPq4HAp8BpE3rDoojyqCgbo3BTvdb=TheOnly1"  But I fear it is not that easy... So you still need an address? What's the point then  As I am not a programmer, I think the addresses are still needed for the system. But in my oppinion users should not be confronted with addresses and stuff. Just with theyr choosen wallet names. So nothing else is needed than a possibility to connect a wallet public key with a name. I dont think this is such a difficult and big change in Bitcoin system... Get it?? If the address is still needed then you have done nothing, because you will still need to get it from somewhere, be it a qr code or another service. It actually is difficult to add this to bitcoin directly, that's why it should be added as another layer on top of it (offload it to wallets directly) using a different blockchain. |
|
|
|
In my imagination the additional code in the blockchain looks just like "1561BfPq4HAp8BpE3rDoojyqCgbo3BTvdb=TheOnly1" But I fear it is not that easy... So you still need an address? What's the point then |
|
|
|
|
I think all here welcome new ideas but there's a reason firstbits didn't catch on - because they have several problems as stated in the wiki and in the end are not that important, at least for the moment.
|
|
|
|
Like this I still can not enter the wallet name as receiver in any wallet client.
I have to use additionl software and set up. That makes things more complicated, not easier.
And if you add such a feature into bitcoin directly it makes its code more bloated, making it more difficult for developers to re-implement, and also making wallet development harder. Adding the same feature on top of bitcoin layer only makes wallet development harder. In any case if such a feature is so important to you, you will use a wallet that supports it, with any shortcomings it might have but you can live with. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
