|
3
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: How is it possible to measure the amount of nodes that are just "listening" ?
|
on: November 01, 2017, 10:22:41 AM
|
Come on we're playing semantics. Yes, obviously a SPV wallet doesn't fully verify like a full node does, but it does simply verify transactions which is the point. It has limited trust to a third party and since the information it receives from a third party is cross verified with others and
The point is that SPV wallets can't and don't "simply verify transactions". There is no verification that can be done without having the transactions that a transaction spends from. Definition
A method for verifying if particular transactions are included in a block without downloading the entire block. The method is used by some lightweight Bitcoin clients. I take it you're arguing that SPV wallets don't "verify transactions" but they verify that the transaction is included in a block? |
|
|
|
|
4
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: How is it possible to measure the amount of nodes that are just "listening" ?
|
on: October 31, 2017, 11:24:48 AM
|
SPV does verify. I don't know what definition you're using when you say it doesn't self-verify, but it does verify transactions itself and doesn't rely on a trusted third party to verify.
That is untrue. A SPV wallet cannot fully verify a transaction. It does not have the UTXO set, so it cannot fully verify it. Even if it does know the previous transactions, it does not know the transactions that those spend from and so on. If it did, it would basically be a full node, which they are not. Because an SPV node does not have the UTXO set and has not verified the chain of transactions that a given transaction is part of, it must trust the node that gave it the transaction and trust that that node gave it the right transaction and that the transaction was valid to it. Without the previous transactions, it cannot verify that the input script is correct. Without the previous transactions, it cannot verify that the amounts in the outputs are valid. Come on we're playing semantics. Yes, obviously a SPV wallet doesn't fully verify like a full node does, but it does simply verify transactions which is the point. It has limited trust to a third party and since the information it receives from a third party is cross verified with others and it is deep in the blockchain, there's a fair assumption of truth in it. The point is that every person isn't going to run a full node, and you want all users to have a decentralised self verifying experience. SPV nodes on mobile are the best answer to this. |
|
|
|
|
5
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: How is it possible to measure the amount of nodes that are just "listening" ?
|
on: October 30, 2017, 09:25:09 AM
|
SPV doesn't self-verify. It blindly trusts.
SPV does verify. I don't know what definition you're using when you say it doesn't self-verify, but it does verify transactions itself and doesn't rely on a trusted third party to verify. In terms of trust, the trust is minimal in an SPV node. Would you prefer the majority of users use web wallets where they must be centrally trusted by a single authority, or mobile SPV wallets where at least the level of trust required is minimal and users can verify? |
|
|
|
|
14
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: 2X
|
on: September 25, 2017, 09:23:46 AM
|
Its not the merits of core vs 2x thread. As i said in OP, I am curious as to how this might play out. When will we know how many are "locked in" to either side? Will the fork happen regardless and we wont know until after how many miners support each or is it possible that the fork will not happen due to overwhelming support for either side?
TBH I don't know and this really requires clarification. The miners are in opposition to the running nodes at the moment, and the user community is utterly impossible to gauge accurately. Business doesn't seem to care, it will go to whatever is successful. I believe that ultimate control comes down to miners in the end. If miners mine 2X and nobody mines the legacy, then that's all she wrote. |
|
|
|
|
15
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Tezos discussion
|
on: September 17, 2017, 01:11:07 PM
|
you should have a pdf with all info or at least your password somewhere to check your balance and access your coins. Think the password is most crucial as without it you can't recover your coins - if I"m wrong here please correct me.
So why didn't I get anything at all? My transaction went through, I have a passphrase I wrote down but I got nothing in my email. |
|
|
|
|
16
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Tezos discussion
|
on: September 14, 2017, 12:29:34 PM
|
So I threw in a bit of ETH in the crowdsale, transaction pops up on etherscan, but I totally forgot about this.
What happens now, should I have got my tezos by now?
You should, but there's no wallet or something yet. If all is correct you should have a pdf with all info or at least your password somewhere to check your balance and access your coins. Uh, do you mean for my ethereum address? Because I haven't got anything at all from Tezos. There's no tezos tokens on my eth address, or anything like that, even though the transaction shows up as confirmed on etherscan? |
|
|
|
|
18
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] ♬ Opus - Beta-Ready Decentralized Music Sharing; Running on IPFS and ETH ♬
|
on: September 10, 2017, 12:27:36 PM
|
how far does the course of opus still fall? does he go down to 100 satoshi? the bounty hunters are still sold. or he goes under 100 satoshi . I get really anxious when I see the price decline . 701 satoshi now. that's damn little. no one has confidence in the project
Its not really worth worrying about IMO. Opus is one of the few projects that actually seems like it will be successful in the long term. If you want quick pump and dump gains from coins that are ultimately useless, look elsewhere. for me, OPUS is a buy and hold long term. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
