Bitcoin Forum
December 17, 2017, 10:20:21 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
  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 »
1  Bitcoin / Press / [2017-05-01] Falkvinge: Blockstream having patents in Segwit makes [...] on: May 01, 2017, 06:24:59 PM
Blockstream having patents in Segwit makes all the weird pieces of the last three years fall perfectly into place

Some excerpts:
Quote
Based on Blockstream’s behavior in the Bitcoin community, I have become absolutely certain that Segwit contains patents that Blockstream and/or their owners have planned to use offensively. I base this not on having read the actual patents, for they can be kept secret for quite some time; I base this on observing Blockstream’s behavior, and having seen the exact same behavior many times before in the past 20 years from entities that all went bankrupt.
[...]
Quote
first, let’s compress the last three years of dialogue between Blockstream and the non-Blockstream bitcoin community:

[BS] We’re developing Lightning as a Layer-2 solution! It will require some really cool additional features!
[com] Ok, sounds good, but we need to scale on-chain soon too.
[BS] We’ve come up with this Segwit package to enable the Lightning Network. It’s kind of a hack, but it solves malleability and quadratic hashing. It has a small scaling bonus as well, but it’s not really intended as a scaling solution, so we don’t like it being talked of as such.
[com] Sure, let’s do that and also increase the blocksize limit.
[BS] We hear that you want to increase the block size.
[com] Yes. A 20 megabyte limit would be appropriate at this time.
[BS] We propose two megabytes, for a later increase to four and eight.
[com] That’s ridiculous, but alright, as long as we’re scaling exponentially.
[BS] Actually, we changed our mind. We’re not increasing the blocksize limit at all.
[com] Fine, we’ll all switch to Bitcoin Classic instead.
[BS] Hello Miners! Will you sign this agreement to only run Core software in exchange for us promising a two-megabyte non-witness-data hardfork?
[miners] Well, maybe, but only if the CEO of Blockstream signs.
[Adam] *signs as CEO of Blockstream*
[miners] Okay. Let’s see how much honor you have.
[Adam] *revokes signature immediately to sign as “Individual”*
[miners] That’s dishonorable, but we’re not going to be dishonorable just because you are.
[BS] Actually, we changed our mind, we’re not going to deliver a two-megabyte hardfork to you either.
[com] Looking more closely at Segwit, it’s a really ugly hack. It’s dead in the water. Give it up.
[BS] Segwit will get 95% support! We have talked to ALL the best companies!
[com] There is already 20% in opposition to Segwit. It’s impossible for it to achieve 95%.
[BS] Segwit is THE SCALING solution! It is an ACTUAL blocksize increase!
[com] We need a compromise to end this stalemate.
[BS] Segwit WAS and IS the compromise! There must be no blocksize limit increase! Segwit is the blocksize increase!

[...]

Quote
With that said, Blockstream has something called a “Defensive Patent Pledge”. It’s a piece of legal text that basically says that they will only use their patents for defensive action, or for any other action.

Did you get that last part?

That’s a construction which is eerily similar to “terrorism and other crimes”, where that “and other crimes” creates a superset of “terrorism”, and therefore even makes the first part completely superfluous.

Politican says: “Terrorism and other crimes.”
The public hears: “Terrorism.”
What it really means: “Any crime including jaywalking.”

The Blockstream patent pledge has exactly this pattern: Blockstream will only use their patents defensively, or in any other way that Blockstream sees fitting.

Blockstream says: “For defense only, or any other reason.”
The public hears: “For defense only.”
What it really means: “For any reason whatsoever.”

Quote
Let’s assume good faith here for a moment, and that Greg Maxwell and Adam Back of Blockstream really don’t have any intention to use patents offensively, and that they’re underwriting the patent pledge with all their personal credibility.

It’s still not worth anything.

In the event that Blockstream goes bankrupt, all the assets – including these patents – will go to a liquidator, whose job it is to make the most money out of the assets on the table, and they are not bound by any promise that the pre-bankruptcy management gave.

Moreover, the owners of Blockstream may — and I predict will — replace the management, in which case the personal promises from the individuals that have been replaced have no weight whatsoever on the new management. If a company makes a statement to its intentions, it is also free to make the opposite statement at a future date, and is likely to do so when other people are speaking for the company.

[...]
Quote
The owners of Blockstream are the classic financial institutions, specifically AXA, that have everything to lose from cryptocurrency gaining ground.
2  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Fuck: SegWit, LN, Blockstream, Core, Adam Back, and GMazwell on: March 26, 2017, 08:28:11 AM
Quote
And before you try to point fingers and accusing me of helping a side, I am telling you, I don't care who wins, I am tired of your BS and I am going to ditch Bitcoins until things clear.
Well, in my view a more interesting approach would be to buy before a potential split, so that whoever it wins, you win anyway.
3  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: Guida al hard fork di Bitcoin (nel caso capiti) - IMPORTANTE on: March 20, 2017, 03:28:14 PM
Quote
BU ha una politica sulle tx di fare broadcast solo delle prime che ricevono.
Occhio che questo non è affatto garantito anche perché ci potrebbero essere dei miner che decidono di usare https://bitcoinec.info/ oppure custom code e quant'altro.

Il metodo più sicuro rimane quello di legare le propre tx a degli input della sola chain nuova. Avevo letto di una proposta per cui i miner avrebbero creato una coinbase con migliaia di out da un satoshi da usare appositamente per evitare il replay attack, ma non so se la cosa è andata avanti perché serve una politica per la distribuzione (scusate se ne avete già parlato, non ho letto tutto il thread).
4  Local / Off-Topic (Italiano) / Re: WB21.com - Conto bancario online gratuito con possibilità di deposito in Bitcoin on: November 11, 2016, 01:07:54 PM
Il problema di questa banca (che inizialmente non avevo visto), è che ogni tipo di trasferimento costa l'1% di fees.
Anche i bonifici nella stessa area.

Peccato, altrimenti funziona piuttosto bene.
5  Economy / Micro Earnings / Re: TestNet Faucet (testnet.coinfaucet.eu) on: October 10, 2016, 05:31:15 PM
Thanks for this service!

I would like to make a transaction toward the faucet for testing purposes but I'm unable to because of the 12h delay.

Are there any other testnet faucets available?
6  Local / Off-Topic (Italiano) / Re: WB21.com - Conto bancario online gratuito con possibilità di deposito in Bitcoin on: June 15, 2016, 05:48:40 AM
L'iban che viene dato a che nazione corrisponde, DE?
7  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning on: June 13, 2016, 08:04:35 PM
woaaaa
ETH , PASSED $17 !!!
Yes, it seems so easy to sell scamcoins to people these days...
8  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: [NEWS] In italiano - Raccolta di link dei media in lingua italiana on: April 16, 2016, 07:04:32 PM
Un nuovo concetto, quello di cripto-economia, richiede nuova conoscenza:

http://ilporticodipinto.it/content/bitcoin-problemi-di-calcolo
9  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Clearing the FUD around segwit on: April 04, 2016, 12:44:48 PM
remember the signatures are moved. to allow them to be processed differently. and old clients cant reject the transaction simply because it doesnt have a signature, if its locked into a confirmed block by a malicious miner. instead its just overlooked.
Your example is invalid because this "malicious miner" can't include an invalid tx in a block, otherwise the whole block would be invalid and hence rejected by the network.
The tx would be invalid, no matter how "funky" it is, because you have to correctly sign the inputs, and if you do not have the private keys of the inputs, you can't provide signatures.
[...]
to a old client its not invalid.. its just funky.. just like old clients would treat transactions in the future after segwit is released.. still funky to old clients.
remember old clients WILL NOT see the signature area. so they wont validate the transaction. they will just blindly accept it.
I'm sorry, but you just don't understand how bitcoin works (and hence segwit): as many others have already explained to you, you are just confusing inputs with outputs.
While it's true that old clients will not verify segwit signatures, those signatures are for segwit outputs. Old transactions (like the one of satoshi you would suggest) are old-style transactions and hence, with new or old rules, needs normal signatures for their inputs.
So you can't spend them in both old or new network rules without having the relevant private keys, no matter how "funky" the outputs are (please understand this is the only part of the tx you can mess with).
10  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Clearing the FUD around segwit on: April 04, 2016, 05:57:36 AM
remember the signatures are moved. to allow them to be processed differently. and old clients cant reject the transaction simply because it doesnt have a signature, if its locked into a confirmed block by a malicious miner. instead its just overlooked.
Your example is invalid because this "malicious miner" can't include an invalid tx in a block, otherwise the whole block would be invalid and hence rejected by the network.

The tx would be invalid, no matter how "funky" it is, because you have to correctly sign the inputs, and if you do not have the private keys of the inputs, you can't provide signatures.

No way to bypass that step, it's how Bitcoin works, and it's made expressly to avoid the attacks you are describing.
11  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: full node for dummies on: February 22, 2016, 09:03:14 PM
Informo il thread che ieri a HK si è tenuto un meeting fra membri del team core, e alcuni grossi miners cinesi.
Così ad occhio, il più grosso miner era quello in centro, dietro, ma non mi sembra cinese...

;-)
12  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: [NEWS] In italiano - Raccolta di link dei media in lingua italiana on: February 10, 2016, 01:40:26 PM
Un articolo non particolarmente brillante (anzi), ma almeno è la traduzione italiana:

Come l'oro e la blockchain possono funzionare assieme
13  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: An Open Letter from Sam Cole (CEO of KNC Miner) on: January 15, 2016, 08:25:14 PM
Bitcoin core = altcoin. Soon.
+1
14  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: [NEWS] In italiano - Raccolta di link dei media in lingua italiana on: January 07, 2016, 04:43:10 PM
2016: L'ascesa delle criptovalute indipendenti

Visto l'avvio dei mercati con perdite record in Cina, quest'anno si prospetta estremamente interessante.
15  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: [NEWS] In inglese - Thread contenitore per notizie varie on: December 29, 2015, 07:22:13 AM
Non trovo più il thread per le notizie italiane o tradotte, sapete mica aiutarmi?

Nel frattempo segnalo qui la traduzione di questo interessante articolo di Falkvinge riguardo la privacy finanziaria:

http://ilporticodipinto.it/content/bitcoin-tassazione-e-riservatezza-sulle-transazioni-finanziarie
16  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: Siti per sapere le fee consigliate da pagare per ottenere in tempo le conferme on: December 16, 2015, 06:03:33 PM
Sapete se ce n'è uno che permette di avere questo dato via API?
http://www.cointape.com/api

Ho provato ma ottengo sempre: "502 Bad Gateway - nginx/1.4.1"
17  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: Siti per sapere le fee consigliate da pagare per ottenere in tempo le conferme on: December 16, 2015, 05:53:43 PM
Ciao Dusty,

sono l'autore del primo dei siti indicati http://estimatefee.appspot.com
L'indirizzo http://estimatefee.appspot.com/last ritorna un JSON con la stima delle ultime fee
Ciao Xenoky, grazie dell'informazione!

A mio avviso però dovresti però formattare il dato utilizzando dei numeri a precisione finita invece che double, o, meglio ancora, in satoshi.

In questo momento ad esempio il risultato è questo:
{"timestamp":1450288202577,"block1":4.4327E-4,"block2":1.9892E-4,"block25":4.424E-5,"block12":8.606E-5,"block6":1.1408E-4}

e la notazione esponenziale non è ideale, secondo me.
18  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: Siti per sapere le fee consigliate da pagare per ottenere in tempo le conferme on: December 13, 2015, 08:49:33 AM
Sapete se ce n'è uno che permette di avere questo dato via API?
19  Local / Italiano (Italian) / Re: Minecraft - Faucet/PVP - Integrazione Bitcoin on: October 28, 2015, 02:25:08 PM
Bellissima iniziativa, complimenti!

Sperimenterei volentieri, ma ho solo la versione crackata Tongue
20  Bitcoin / Press / Re: [2015-09-26]NewsBTC - Ten Great Books on Bitcoin on: September 26, 2015, 04:15:58 PM
I just finished to read "Bitcoin: The Future of Money?" by Dominic Frisby and it became my favourite.

It's not technical, and very apt for a general public.

Not only Dominic is a great writer, but he has a profound knowledge of (Austrian) economics, very entertaining book.
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 »
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!