Bitcoin Forum
June 14, 2021, 05:09:22 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  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 »
1  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: June 16, 2016, 12:27:02 PM
ok..you are a senior member and do not get the withholding attack ideea?

Which one? Do you mean Finney attack (committed by the pool and buyer against some merchant)? Or do you mean block withholding attack committed by individual miner against mining pool?
If there is another kind of withholding attack I would be delighted to know.
2  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: June 04, 2016, 01:43:12 PM
i don't believe his honesty 100% now.i have a clear feeling that from time to time he is not sharing the blocks foud. i know for sure that he has another pool server with another adress for pool login because i was invited in a while back ago. my speculation is that he is broadcasting blocks from time to time from the second one.....so...sadly i'll leave this pool also  Sad

You know what you are hashing, right?
Pool sends you work which includes coinbase address. If it sent some strange coinbase address (not official one belonging to Slush), you would notice. If it sent Slush's pool Coinbase and then Slush used another server to broadcast that block, reward would still go to Slush's pool and you would notice. I do not understand your problem.
3  Local / Other languages/locations / Re: Česky (Czech) on: April 24, 2016, 12:31:24 PM
Hi guys!

I have a question about getting Czech citizenship.
I was born in Czechoslovakia, but my parents are from Russia, were not citizens of the Czech Republic, my father was in the military and seconded to the city of Olomouc, where I was born.

Can I easily get the citizenship, or any privileges in obtaining citizenship. No one knows?

Hallo.
Czech Ministry of Interior handles such cases. Some informations are in English, most of them are Czech only.
http://www.mvcr.cz/mvcren/article/citizenship-of-the-czech-republic.aspx
http://www.mvcr.cz/clanek/udeleni-statniho-obcanstvi-ceske-republiky.aspx
http://www.mvcr.cz/clanek/informace-k-novemu-zakonu-o-statnim-obcanstvi-cr.aspx

What I get from quick reading the text, I think you will need permanent residence ("permanent residence permit for the Czech Republic"). Being born in CR can be advantageous to the citizenship getting, but it is not automatic.
4  Economy / Exchanges / Re: BTC-E.com exchange - BTC/NMC/LTC/NVC/TRC/PPC/FTC/XPM - USD\EUR\RUR (fee - 0.2%) on: March 13, 2016, 10:43:21 PM
And it is up again.
5  Economy / Exchanges / Re: BTC-E TRADING SYSTEM HALTED, WITHDRAWALS NOT WORKING, TROLLBOX PANICKING on: March 13, 2016, 10:39:20 PM
Have there been any trades on Huobi in the last 5 hours?

site appears to be trading

post your link

I see no trading since 14:45.
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/huobi/btccny
6  Economy / Exchanges / Re: BTC-E TRADING SYSTEM HALTED, WITHDRAWALS NOT WORKING, TROLLBOX PANICKING on: March 13, 2016, 02:21:46 PM
Have there been any trades on Huobi in the last 5 hours?
7  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion on: January 26, 2016, 02:40:54 PM
if it reaches $1000 i will dump 150btc, call it a day and do something else with my life. even if it reaches the sun later, no regrets. ive tried enough

Many people will dump around $1000. That is psychological resistance. See the dumps of 27/11 - 28/11 2013.

It's rather logical. That's why I always put my orders a few dollars before the too round numbers xD

That is why dumps also occur at prices like 950$, 1050$, 1040$.  Smiley
8  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion on: January 26, 2016, 01:14:25 PM
if it reaches $1000 i will dump 150btc, call it a day and do something else with my life. even if it reaches the sun later, no regrets. ive tried enough

Many people will dump around $1000. That is psychological resistance. See the dumps of 27/11 - 28/11 2013.
9  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion on: January 26, 2016, 10:43:30 AM
Ok. So let me get this straight.

You are walking up a hill, with a knapsack on your back filled with 4 concrete blocks. Its tough going.
A guy comes up to you ( lets call him Adam) and says "Don''t be a fool, let me make that easier for you".
So the guy removes 2 of the blocks from the knapsack, and puts them under your arms instead.
"Now", says the guy, "Isnt that much easier? You have half the weight, and lots of extra capacity in your bag - win-win, eh?"
"But its the exact same weight! - in fact its a little more difficult to carry these under my arms"
Guy says, "Dont be an idiot - look at your bag. Thats clear evidence of the improvement"
"Oh, i guess...."



Replace concrete blocks by (expanded) polystyrene blocks. Or with inflatable toy blocks with handles.
Whether current content of Bitcoin-blocks is closer to concrete or to inflatable toys with (easy to carry) handles, that is matter of perspective.
10  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion on: January 25, 2016, 10:41:07 AM
i see blocksize fighting is still flooding all the threads ...
opponents of bitcoin will not ...
their incentive to fight seriously is low. they yawn. ...

Unless blocksize fighting isn't (in a part) actually their fight.  Smiley
11  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [9000 TH] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + VarDiff on: January 24, 2016, 09:18:56 AM
So Slush appears to be mining many blocks with the default 750000 byte soft limit. Any plans to change that? That's money left on the table.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/426fjx/so_whos_mining_small_blocks_answer_inside/

I hope Slush stays at 1MB limit. Otherwise it is time for me to move to the pool that does and respects non-hardforked rules. (Does not matter if it is called "Core" or otherwise.)
But of course people who prefer >1MB branch (and believe that it won't lose its utility and consequently value) are free to commit their hashpower to pool that creates bigblocks.
Problem is that pool operators have not stated their policy clearly (and they are more and more influenced by mass pressures). And even if they did, there is no guarantee they will keep this.

This is nothing to do with the 1mb block size limit but the 750000 byte default soft-limit for mining.

OK, my mistake.
12  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [9000 TH] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + VarDiff on: January 23, 2016, 10:45:51 AM
So Slush appears to be mining many blocks with the default 750000 byte soft limit. Any plans to change that? That's money left on the table.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/426fjx/so_whos_mining_small_blocks_answer_inside/

I hope Slush stays at 1MB limit. Otherwise it is time for me to move to the pool that does and respects non-hardforked rules. (Does not matter if it is called "Core" or otherwise.)
But of course people who prefer >1MB branch (and believe that it won't lose its utility and consequently value) are free to commit their hashpower to pool that creates bigblocks.
Problem is that pool operators have not stated their policy clearly (and they are more and more influenced by mass pressures). And even if they did, there is no guarantee they will keep this.
13  Bitcoin / Mining / Re: Miners support for hardfork in Coinbase? on: January 23, 2016, 09:37:27 AM
Nobody else have any ideas or opinions?
Is there a better section of forum for this thread?
14  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Blocksize needs to be increased now. on: January 21, 2016, 07:08:10 PM
Unfortunately regular users doesn't have much say on the matter as it will be decided by big companies with significant share in the bitcoin world.

Regular users can refuse (do not accept) forked bitcoins as payment. Or they can migrate to services which stay on consensus path.
Big mining pools are composed of many small miners (hashers). Big companies would not find their BTC as valuable if common people (and/or significant players) won't accept them as payment or as wage or as collateral or whatever.
15  Bitcoin / Mining / Miners support for hardfork in Coinbase? on: January 21, 2016, 11:08:55 AM
Hallo,
I was thinking about a way to clarify current heated and politicized blocksize debate. Simple statements about different levels of support encoded in coinbase would be helpful and would allow predictable conditions for various agents in Bitcoin ecosystem.
Quote
During BIP100 / 101 (XT), pools signed their coinbase "BIP100" if they preferred it. At the XT announcement, many block makers said they'd support XT but *never* made an XT compatible block.

Would something like this be possible today? There are of course lists about which pool support what branch (Bitcoin Classic, maxblocksize increase, Bitcoin Core, Roadmap, ...). But such lists are biased depending on the source, policies develop and statements from various representatives are fuzzy and sometimes contradictory.

We have several large pools, but despite this the mining is not centralized, because these pools are composed of large number of individual miners. Clear policy expressed in coinbase would be guide for these small miners where to (re)direct their mining power according to their opinions.

Base of my proposal (which is open to comments and suggestions) is this:
- four levels of support (active/passive/opposed) (+//-)
- Main branches as simple strings (Core, Classic, Unlimited, Roadmap, 1MB, 2MB, 4MB, 2-4-6, BIP10x).
- Strings signed by some simplified way, if possible

For example:
- String: "*Core+,Roadmap+,Classic,4MB-*" means:
  • Active support for Core and Roadmap (Our poll will generate blocks according to Core&Roadmap specification)
  • Passive support for Classic (We will not generate blocks according to Classic specification. However, we will build on them.)
  • Opposition to 4MB (We will never generate 4MB blocks and we will actively orphan such blocks - that is consider them invalid and inconsequential. No matter where this proposal comes from (included in Core, included in Classic) and which Developers support it.)
- String: "*Core,Roadmap(RBF)-,Classic+,4MB*" means:
  • Passive support for Core (We will consider <1MB blocks as valid)
  • Opposition to RBF (We will orphan/ignore blocks containing any RBF transactions as specified by Roadmap)
  • Active support for Classic (We will happily and preferentially generate 2MB blocks according to Classic specification. We will build on them.)
  • Passive support for 4MB (We will not generate 4MB blocks, but we will not ignore such blocks - We will reluctantly bulid on them.)

Of course strings can be more detailed (*SegWitCore-,SegWitClassic+,>1MB+,>8MB(until2018)-*). Interpretation would be matter of external actors (I think someone would probably create webpage for this.] But all interpretations would allow fallback to verifiable data for everyone.


As to the signing... I placed strings between two * symbols for a reason. I think this is the way they should be in coinbase followed by some simple signature. Reason for this: Any pool can pose as another pool (eg. BitFury can put "Slush" string in coinbase, Slush can put "Eligius" there etc.) and by this way fake statement of someone else. Simple privkey/pubkey pair where privkey signs *string* between ** and pubkey published on pools webpage/stated by trustworthy source/pool operator can solve this. Statements can also be signed by Bitcoin address publicly stated by pool in advance. But the signature should be short enough?! I do not have specific idea how to do this.

It would be nice if every pool would state several different (even contradictory) policies and open different addresses/ports for its hashers to "vote" on them a dynamically change their votes. Data analysis people would love this! But of course pool operators can express their policies by limiting the choice or not signalizing at all.

So...what do you think?
16  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: Don't mine on Eligius on: January 20, 2016, 01:39:44 PM
Just a warning. I just asked a question in the eligius thread, and the owner of seems completely out of touch with the current happenings in bitcoin, namely the forking issues. He refuses to answer questions on whether he would follow the most popular chain in the event that a hardfork occurs, and banned me from his thread after I pressed him, because it's a very simple yet extremely important question to answer. Very worrisome behavior. I fear he is liable to mine on the original chain even if the majority switches, out of spite at what he adamantly calls "altcoins", jeopardizing his user's money. If you value your money I wouldn't mine there, especially if a hardfork begins to seem likely in the near future.

So Eligius will likely mine on original chain and consider all >1MB blocks invalid even under pressure of majority mining power, economic actors, popular "vote" and government?
17  Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion on: January 20, 2016, 12:44:06 PM
Quote
People need to do a bank run in every exchange (maybe even online wallets too) well before we reach the point of the hard fork, to ensure that they have control of their BTCs.

AlexGR raises an excellent point. If there is an upcoming contentious hardfork scheduled then the first things people are going to do is withdraw ALL their coins off the exchanges and out of any custodial services.

All those bitcoin alliance folks and corporates that have made their businesses out of holding on to other people's coins in custody should keep that mind whilst they are pushing for contentious hardforks.

Ah, AlexGR's FUD sidekick...

Which idiots are going to leave their coins on an exchange or with Coinbase or BitGo or Bitpay before a hardfork? Almost all custody coins are going to be going back to their rightful owners before a contentious hardfork, the free market will do its job no?

Why leave the vote with the third party holders which fork your coins will end up on when you can keep your options open and hedge bets by holding them in cold storage for yourself?

*edited.


Is there any reliable information about which exchanges WILL NOT support the fork? I have already tried to start a list here, but no contributions yet...
18  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [9000 TH] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + VarDiff on: January 20, 2016, 10:31:07 AM
Did Slush state his policy towards 2MB (or any other) hardfork*? I know he allowed choice between XT and non-XT in the past. Will this be the case again? So will there be a possibility to commit my hashpower to the branch that will never ever accept >1MB block as valid?(And likewise to commit it by using different address/port to the hardforked branch that will accept it.)
Or will Slush prefer only one branch?


* - This currently means Bicoin Classic, but the name can change in the future as push for bigger blocks divergent from Core Roadmap will surely be communicated under various names again in the future.
19  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: SegWit question on: January 20, 2016, 10:24:32 AM
[1] not sure which prefix though, 1, 2, 3, 5 are used, so maybe 4? or S for SegWit?

It depends on SegWit program. I think it will be p... for P2WPKH address and 7... for a P2WSH address.
But it looks that BIPs change on the go.
Quote
BIP142:
For P2WPKH address, the address version is 6 (0x06) for a main-network address or 3 (0x03) for a testnet address.
For P2WSH address, the address version is 10 (0x0A) for a main-network address or 40 (0x28) for a testnet address.
20  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: SegWit question on: January 19, 2016, 07:29:44 PM
Non-upgraded node (eg. merchant selling goods) would see and accept such transaction as valid (and send goods to customer).

All miners will upgrade software, otherwise they will mine block which will be rejected by majority.

So, this transaction will be unconfirmed for this merchant. Smiley

But I recommend you to upgrade your wallet!

So waiting for at least one confirmation (if all miner upgrade) and 2-3 confirmations if majority upgrade. OR Upgrading wallet.
Exactly those two solutions I excluded and did not ask for.  Smiley
Quote
(besides upgrading node to include segwit and besides waiting for several confirmations for all anyone-can-spend scripts)
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 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!