Im trying to connect my Bitcoin core full node through Tor but I have been waiting for 15 minutes and I still have 0 peers.
I clicked on the "Connect throught SOCKS5 proxy (default proxy)" checkbox and also clicked on the "Use separate SOCKS5 proxy to reach peers via Tor hidden services:"
then restarted the client with these boxes checked and a Tor Browser window opened (I think this was needed) but I cannot see any peers. Im doing something wrong?
The proxy settings are the default ones (127.0.0.1:9050)
So, you are trying to use the bundled Tor from Tor Browser rather than a dedicated Tor daemon? This is not recommended. IIRC, the default TCP port for Tor Browser’s Tor’s SOCKSPort is 127.0.0.1:9150, which explains why Bitcoin could not connect to port 9050. On Linux, at least, recent versions of Tor Browser may even use a UNIX domain socket rather than a TCP socket. But I’m not even sure what it does by default, since I use Tor Browser with an external Tor daemon on a network-isolating gateway. I would need to search—I recommend that you do so, if you really want to use Tor Browser’s Tor. If you want to add another SOCKSPort to Tor Browser, look for Browser/TorBrowser/Data/Tor/torrc. See the Tor manual page for documentation of SOCKSPort. Be aware that this will probably (?) be wiped out when you upgrade Tor Browser. It is strongly recommended that you set up a separate Tor daemon for your Bitcoin. I recommend doing so on a gateway which isolates the internal network; this affirmatively prevents all leaks of your “real” IP address, whether malicious or accidental. Many applications leak horribly, doing direct DNS lookups even when they purport to accept SOCKS proxy settings. You can set up a Tor gateway on a cheap computer with two Ethernet ports, or using VMs within the same physical machine. On FreeBSD, the jail subsystem provides a lightweight means to achieve this. N.b. that if you use a separate Tor daemon with Tor Browser, it requires some muttered incantations to disable Tor Browser’s bundled Tor; and you must do this to avoid “Tor-over-Tor”, which will harm your anonymity as well as killing performance. |
|
|
|
@pebwindkraft, sorry, you were responding to a plagiarist who copied one of my old posts (and also a post by bob123), as reported by BitCryptex.
Replying to you, with corrected attribution: We have sidechains/drivechains/Alpha Elements, where new concepts can be tested. I wouldn't expect something being "the right thing" from the very beginning, but the more development we have, the better it secures bitcoin future. And everything which looks at things that are more than low-level increase of blocksize or amount of coins should benefit future work. There are many people worried about miner centralization(three countries: Canada, Island and China...), unhappy situation with ASIC miners and BCH support, and possibly growing size of blockchain... And then we learned, hard forkes are probably a "no-go". Further development is necessary. So if UASF inspired hardforks are a no-go for MR POWA (wow, what a combination of buzz words!) is not visible, we should encourage ongoing research from many areas, and not only Altcoins, also sidechains can be used. First, I wish to highlight my critical next sentence, which you cut—here in boldface: I do not endorse that proposal; I think it’s interesting, but I have no desire to see collateral damage made of all the fine folks who invested their lives’ savings in SHA-256 hardware, and swore they would mine Bitcoin or nothing.
Sidechains/drivechains/etc. which you mention are irrelevant to concepts such as the MR POWA proposal—or total POW change. These are aptly described as “nuclear options” for the main chain, in case certain ill-intended large centralized miners become an existential threat to Bitcoin. But nuclear war is not a desirable prospect; it always has collateral damage, and it could be MAD. Consider that in recent months, certain evil miners have tried to seriously compromise Bitcoin—and they failed, because other miners kept their own ASICs mining Bitcoin, and the network is much more resilient than some people expected. I want to see commodity SHA-256 ASICs sold cheaper than GPUs, and as readily available. I think that’s probably the best solution, long-term. Too bad I am not a hardware guy.
Yes, in principle I agree. Economies of scale in the manufacturing environments have shown centralization. So even if we find new ASICs with independency from the evil ASIC provider of today, I would guess, that after finding a new cheap SHA256 ASIC cheaper as GPUs, we'd do the race again and find centralization of manufacturer of these new devices, and maybe they implement then a hidden function to flood the blockchain with invalid blocks, bringing new attack vectors to light... Decentralization (to keep independency) is a very, very hard topic. Economically and especially at sociological level... Imagine you could get ten million devices each doing a modest 800 GH/s out on store shelves at a moderate price—made plug-and-play, and advertised as the hot new thing. Just make sure the thing runs quietly, and has sleek industrial design. Congratulations, you just added 8 EH/s—somewhere around ( waves hands) doubling the global hashrate, with half of the global hashrate now spread amongst computer enthusiasts, gadget fetishists, people who want a show-off conversation piece, finance people, maybe even gamers (many of whom have a gadget fetish, and want to show off to their friends). I know that there have been previous attempts to create something along these lines. What is needed is for a well-established, competently managed Bitcoin company with in-house brains and leadership who cares about Bitcoin to take a serious interest in making hardware happen for miner decentralization. I know that the whole process from ASIC development to fabbing, to device design, to manufacturing, to (sometimes most difficult for engineers) distribution would be a challenging task. It is not a project which some genius lone-gun could pull off by himself. (In my dreams: Where’s a Blockstream conspiracy when you need one? If they could do a satellite feed, they’re adept at the sorts of contracts they would need to arrange. They are already hated by Jihan & Co. Go for it.) As for this: and maybe they implement then a hidden function to flood the blockchain with invalid blocks, bringing new attack vectors to light...
Behold the power of nodes: Invalid blocks do not exist, insofar as the blockchain is concerned. Malicious miners can try to make all the invalid blocks they want, whether via “hidden functions” or otherwise; they’d only be wasting their electricity. Malicious hardware manufacturers who added such “hidden functions” would be criminally defrauding their customers, but could not thus damage the Bitcoin network. This is a non-issue. |
|
|
|
Nice work on the segwit vanity gen! However, im currently facing some trouble as i cannot find any decent documentation about how this script works: ./segvan --help
./segvan: invalid option -- '-'
It's missing the --help argument, so what are the programmed options for this, and how do i use this? Also, can i use the segwit addresses with electrum? My apologies. I usually publish software with a manpage, plus a usage info printout on entry of incorrect options; but in this case, I consider the options interface to be unstable. It may change. For now, here is an ad hoc rundown of (only) the most important options: Vanity generation mode:
-r [pattern] Search for bech32 address matching pattern
-R [pattern] Search for Segwit nested P2SH address matching pattern
-I Case-*sensitive* search; does not affect bech32
-i Case-insensitive search (default)
Rapid bulk address generation mode:
-b [naddr] Generate naddr bech32 addresses
-3 [naddr] Generate naddr Segwit nested P2SH ("3") addresses
The two modes are exclusive of each other. However, within each mode, different address types can be handled simultaneously. If you want to search for both "3" addresses and bech32 addresses, each key tested will be tested against both patterns. For bech32, case-insensitive search is always used (regardless of options) for reason that Bech32 addresses themselves are case-insensitive. Patterns are POSIX Extended Regex ( not PCRE or similar). No attempt whatsoever will be made to prevent you from searching on an impossible pattern. If you enter a pattern which cannot be matched by a valid address, then segvan will spin forever. Upon SIGINT (Ctrl-C in the terminal), segvan will gracefully exit after it has finished the current iteration. SIGINFO (on BSD) or SIGUSR1 (Linux) will print statistics to stderr. Addresses and WIF-encoded private keys are output together on an output line, with an intervening tab. This is intended to be friendly for piping through shell scripts. By default (which may change), private keys use a WIF version which is specific to Electrum, and tells Electrum which address type to use. This has been tested by me with Electrum 3. There is currently no multithreading. Vanity search is probabilistic, with no state or need for synchronization between search threads; therefore, you can get similar performance to what multithreading would provide by running one segvan process per CPU core. More options exist, but I am reluctant to document them before they’re stable. Also, there is a hidden option for generating old-style P2PKH “1” addresses. I’m not sure whether I want to document that, because I desire to promote Segwit use. At present, the only valid reason for generating new P2PKH addresses is if you need a Bitcoin key which can be used to sign arbitrary messages, such as forum “stake” messages. (For that particular purpose, I suggest staking a PGP key instead.) I hope this helps. Please be advised that a major update is planned; it has been stalled the past week or so, due to some unfortunate and irrelevant distractions. For now, the code in the master branch is non-feature-complete, but reliable for use; and the code in the keygrind branch is working, but not fully tested. |
|
|
|
Y'all are gonna shit your pants if one of our other participant's posts blow me away more than nullius's posts do this week, and ends up earning them the winning spot for Round 1  I mean, nullius has been pretty preoccupied spending the last week in a high school-like gossip and drama circle, whereas if this challenge would have started last week, his posts most certainly may have been outshined by any other participants' posts haha Join Joe’s Signatureless Challenge, and see if you can beat me at competitive sport-posting. I double dare you. |
|
|
|
why are you wasting time on me?
Already answered this. We are going in circles. Wait. I thought you weren’t selling it now— right?Please do realize, nobody here is personally concerned with proving you wrong. The motive of people arguing with you in this thread is to make sure that nobody else loses money by buying or investing in a mathematical impossibility. If you were claiming something wacky which could not foreseeably cost others money (as Jude Austin with his alleged address collision), then I would have shrugged and gone away by about midway through page 2 of this thread. For my part, I don?t have time for more than casual debunking of such things.
@JayJuanGee, I wished to reply to something you said above— perhaps later. In a nutshell: Specifically in this thread, as to motives, I am genuinely puzzled as to whether Alia is scamming, blinded by a gambler’s obsession with discovering the magic trick to winning, or some mix of both. This question of mens rea (“guilty mind”) is totally irrelevant to my treatment of a mathematically impossible script, which could cause others to lose money if Alia were to commit the actus reus (“guilty act”) of again trying to sell it or take “investors”. But culpability is relevant to how I treat Alia herself. (And just in case you were thinking something else re “empathy”: I assure you that even if against the odds, it be true that Alia is a girl, I find “mathematical mumbo jumbo” and “stupid equations” sneering somewhat less attractive than an active outbreak of genital herpes.)
Oh, my Bitcoin. I wrote the foregoing before the following post appeared, then was suddenly interrupted by a little IRL incident. I will take this as empirical evidence of my psychic powers, or cosmic influence over random events, or something of that nature. And now, I will use this power to win at provably fair gambling!I find “mathematical mumbo jumbo” and “stupid equations” sneering somewhat less attractive than an active outbreak of genital herpes.
I did not refund him because of a tingling in my vag.
|
|
|
|
Sigh... call some of my investors to this thread (aka SyGambler, nullius, TelevisionLover, so on) and ask them to post their deposit tx. It will have either gone directly to BaB or to Satoshi Mines, Cryptobust, or some other btc gambling site
I already posted my deposit txid. Note that there was no change: I anonymized a single coin, then sent that coin (less tx fee) to whatever address Alia specified to me. The exact deposit amount was 0.01101346 BTC. Per my standard procedure, I requested that all info (addresses, amounts, etc.) be handled with PGP encryption. I want at least one tiny shred of blockchain privacy. However, I think after this, I will need to thoroughly anonymize this coin anyway. (And if you wonder where it came from: Thorough anonymization. Knock yourself out looking.)
txid for 0.01101346 BTC sent nullius → alia:
554962af97ea469ade363e4f6e402de37e9270a242e81b45c5dfa7b21e8fcc0b
txid for 0.021 BTC (exactly) received alia → nullius:
44e3aeed8ba068f52e048d76776205bcee05902af7db1eecbd697e7ac819c1ec
(Edit: Yes, as you will note, she allegedly gambled and then sent 0.021 BTC while my 0.01101346 BTC was still unconfirmed. Either I’m trustworthy for not committing a double-spend attack on 0.01101346 BTC, or the amounts were unimportant for serving the objective, or both.)
I gambled with Alia. She did not tell me the name of the site, and I didn’t ask.... .....it sounds like you gave her 0.01 and she gave you back 0.02 without you having the slightest proof that any "gambling" actually took place.You told me that you initially lost all my money. You said you covered it with your own funds, then recovered, won, and split the profit with me. Just to tidy up something for me please nullius, is the bolded bit essentially what happened, (with the later detail)? I.e. you never actually saw any wagers being placed or a real time P/L indicator, she simply told you the end result? Sticking to the facts here: It is correct that I had no proof that gambling had occurred. Alia never told me what site she was ostensibly gambling on, and I did not ask. Not that it would have mattered: I know little enough about gambling that prior to seeing discussion amidst this scandal, I did not know that gambling sites had any publicly viewable wager or P/L pages. (Incidentally, the neutral trust feedback which I left for Alia for this transaction was stated quite precisely as to facts (although I do not still agree with the opinion thereby stated, and thus removed it). I write trust feedback comments with an almost legalistic treatment of facts. And I sent neutral feedback—not out of any distrust for Alia, but because I am extremely conservative about trust. For a single apparently successful transaction risking 0.01 BTC with someone with whom I have been in communication for all of eight days, formally neutral feedback is prescribed by my written trust feedback policy.) Besides public posts in the “naked gambling” thread, all my communications with Alia in the matter occurred via PM. I requested PGP encryption, since I consider traceable blockchain information (addresses, txids, weird amounts) to be confidential (now blown—by me). As to the pertinent part of those communications, I will quote in pertinent part my more recent post from which you excerpted two sentences, which you did not link: You told me that you initially lost all my money. You said you covered it with your own funds, then recovered, won, and split the profit with me. Beforehand, when you told me that you would not set a stop-loss as I requested, you said (of your own initiative) that you would instead insure my funds; but you did not say that insurance included continued gambling with a split of profits. FWIW / at face value: The story is, I lost your initial deposit, so I loaded 0.1 BTC of my own to make it back. Now I'm 0.2 BTC in the green, withdrew a bit of profit, and playing with house money, so thank you xD gpg: Signature made Fri Feb 23 06:35:49 2018 UTC
gpg: using RSA key 857D1532A793AAAA0247DE92CED5586964477E72
gpg: Good signature from "Alia <...>"
Primary key fingerprint: 857D 1532 A793 AAAA 0247 DE92 CED5 5869 6447 7E72
I wish to address some other issues in this case; but the Alia affair has consumed the bulk of my time and energy for most of the past week, and I need to do other things now. Perhaps later. |
|
|
|
Thread split from the merit abuse thread in Meta, since TryNinja beat me to the punch with something I had been investigating. This is a labyrinth of alts and account sales. I may edit and/or add to this post as evidence accrues. At this point, there is sufficient documentation to issue feedback to many of the below-listed accounts, with this post as the reference.
Alts, and/or sold accounts made by same individual, and/or otherwise closely connected accounts:- #1800324 “CasinoExpert”, registered 2018-02-05 04:49:12 UTC; Jr. Member; password recently reset, according to trust summary. Has received a total of 20 merit from “77kdub” and “lolgato1”, sent a total of 10 merit to “HumberWins”. Red-tagged 2018-03-01 by The Pharmacist as an account seller. Last active 2018-03-04 (currently active). Uses e-mail address francis1997a@outlook.com (thanks TryNinja for catching this; archive):
where to contact you? do u have skype? or selly accounts?
Hello contact me francis1997a@outlook.com skype I have three account netflix HD Ultra 4 supports tv - #1644102 “HumberWins”, registered 2018-01-10 00:34:10 UTC; Member; password and e-mail recently reset/changed, according to trust summary. Has received a total of 10 merit from “CasinoExpert”, thus rising to Member rank. A snapshot of this account’s merit summary is below. Red-tagged 2018-01-31 by The Pharmacist as an account seller. Uses e-mail address caevajus8181@gmail.com (archive) (Subject: “Re: buy verified GDAX accounts”):
- #1093331 “YoYoBot”. Red-tagged as a scammer by Lauda 2018-01-03. Uses e-mail address caevajus8181@gmail.com (archive) (Subject: “(PAID O_O) BITCOIN TRANSACTION ACCELERATOR GUARANTEED MAXIMUM 1 HOUR”):
(PAID O_O) BITCOIN TRANSACTION ACCELERATOR GUARANTEED MAXIMUM 1 HOUR I am a member of f2pool.com that I can currently accelerate and I also use btc.com which are currently paid but as I am a member of these web pages, I can grant them discounts The price of the acceleration will depend on the amount of the transactions and also the commissions and will be guaranteed with a maximum term of 1 hour. Otherwise, if we do not comply with our guarantee, we will try again and have 1 opportunity, but there are few probabilities, but it will confirm within 1 hour If you find it interesting to write here or pm, or otherwise I can be at 24 hours in that email caevajus8181@gmail.com will answer me or my other partners will answer We are happy to serve you - #524606 “ser1ck”; see this post by Timelord2067 for allegations of yet more alts I have not run down. Apparent scammer. Uses e-mail address francis1997a@outlook.com:
Alt account of lokos1913a, polloptc et al. Hi i sell bitcoin and receive paypal skrill neteller Avaliable :0.43 BTC You send first o use escrow Send pm or skype francis1997a@outlook.com
Prima facie merit abusers, not currently suspected of being alts of the above (evidence welcome):- On 2018-03-02, #729028 “lolgato1” (a “Sr. Member”) awarded 10 merits to a post saying only and exactly this (archive):
Price $15
This was for the OP in a thread titled, “Neteller account verified” in the “Digital Goods → Invites & Accounts” section. - On 2018-03-03, #459892 “77kdub” (a “Hero Member”) awarded 10 merits to a post saying only and exactly this (archive):
yo solo 1 vez al dia
...thus, completing the 20 merits which “CasinoExpert” needed to have 10 sMerit to give to “HumberWins”.
Need corroborating evidence connecting “CasinoExpert” to 1Q8PWr4LLNqQcqAwMYA8QwEyhpJm9Z7qRm:#652487 “magemist” has been widely making the following ( archived) accusation against “CasinoExpert” in many threads; however, “magemist” is not a trustworthy accuser. It is not unlikely that this information be correct. However, in my judgment, it needs corroboration: Have 0.03 BTC wanna sell
PM OR POST
Dont believe this fucker. He is running a scam here using multiple accounts all linked by this one address: https://blockchain.info/address/1Q8PWr4LLNqQcqAwMYA8QwEyhpJm9Z7qRmJust look at all the payments made mine being the last one made. Other accounts: Humberone, Davidxxx and alot more. Francisco Carjavel is his name he gave out. The 1Q8PWr4LLNqQcqAwMYA8QwEyhpJm9Z7qRm address is used by at least the following accounts (list is a work in progress): - #1106392 “HumbertDice”, registered 2017-08-13 15:08:25 UTC; Jr. Member; trust summary; red-tagged by Lauda 2018-01-19 for multiple abuses. 56 activity, 73 posts, 0 merit. Last active 2017-09-25 19:31:37 UTC. Evidence (archived):
Loan Amount : 0.005 btc
Collateral : Bitcointalk account
Loan reason : Personal payment
Your BTC Address : 1Q8PWr4LLNqQcqAwMYA8QwEyhpJm9Z7qRm
Date of repayment : 3/08/2017
amount to repay 0.0065btc
- #1342249 HumbertxD, registered 2017-11-23 15:17:28 UTC; Newbie; password recently reset, according to trust summary; red-tagged by Lauda 2017-12-07 for multiple abuses. 13 activity, 13 posts, 0 merit. Last active 2018-02-18 01:24:05 UTC. Evidence (archived) from OP of topic titled, “!!!!!!!!!!!!!Bitcoin transaction accelerator FREE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”:
Hello friend, I can help you to accelerate your free transactions and it would be good if you helped me to donate since I need for my operation
Just leave your txid and your transactions will be accelerated in minutes if I am available
Wallet donation: 1Q8PWr4LLNqQcqAwMYA8QwEyhpJm9Z7qRm
Thank you
Cut and paste of notes from the Meta thread:https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=1644102Replaced with archival links; red stars added to mark out posts merited multiple times: Merit summary for HumberWinsMerit: 10 Sent in the last 120 daysReceived in the last 120 days- March 03, 2018, 02:41:49 AM: 5 from CasinoExpert for Email problem!! *
- March 02, 2018, 09:06:43 PM: 1 from CasinoExpert for منصه لتعدين الذهب على البلوكتشين *
- March 02, 2018, 09:05:31 PM: 1 from CasinoExpert for Email problem!! *
- March 02, 2018, 09:04:14 PM: 1 from CasinoExpert for Re: 🚀[BOUNTY]🚀Fund Platform - digital funds solution
- March 02, 2018, 09:03:43 PM: 1 from CasinoExpert for LELE COIN اجعل كل شيء متاح في يد الجميع
- March 02, 2018, 09:02:36 PM: 1 from CasinoExpert for منصه لتعدين الذهب على البلوكتشين *
https://web.archive.org/web/20180304231119/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2751296.msg31219406#msg31219406
https://web.archive.org/web/20180304224458/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2816184.msg28984243#msg28984243https://web.archive.org/web/20180304224426/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2665015.msg27182671#msg27182671(Good catch. I had not caught that e-mail yet.) https://web.archive.org/web/20180304224409/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3047492.msg31366785#msg31366785 |
|
|
|
Moved to Reputation: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3066549.0
My original post here:Excellent work, TryNinja. I was already tracing that one; you beat me to the punch! I will update this post with potentially useful info. Thanks. I was in charge of that giveaway, and I can say with confidence lolgato is not Humber.
Thank you. I edited the post since I haven't been able to find any possible evidence that lolgato/catwalk can be Humber. I saw those, and did not see evidence that they are alts; but those +10s were clearly made in bad faith. They look to me more like different individuals improperly colluding in some fashion. |
|
|
|
|
To clarify my intents with this thread:
American politics present not the same two contestants each time, but the same two variations of the same contestant. By fixing candidates with insider party politics via the “primary” system, America has perfected the art of a falsely bifurcated one-party system with two faces. Besides window-dressings to excite the proles, the only differences between the candidates are in what special-interests they pander to. Appearances and breakable promises aside, they are never permitted to differ by even an iota on any question of long-term or large-scale importance.
But my criticism is not limited to America—though they’re by far the worst in the West for institutionally rigged electoral politics, and the best at hiding their corruption.
In principle, right answers are not determined by numeric majorities. Were you poll Roger Ver, James Dimon, and Greg Maxwell on engineering, monetary, and economic questions, then the resulting answers would all be wrong. Advancing this concept, let Minitru Media hype a new discovery that 2+2=5. Then, take a poll on the value of twice two. You will get votes for “4” from Winston Smith and a few others who are politically incorrect, and “5” from the overwhelming majority. This is the underlying principle of democracy; and it’s not a bug: It’s a feature.
Moreover, universal suffrage is ochlocracy by definition. Yet a mob never rules itself; and no stable government has ever permitted idiots even the slightest chance of influencing important matters of policy. Who rules mob rule? And what are the implications of idiots being permitted a vote?
If my vote has value equal to the vote of a grinning idiot who casts ballots based on what’s shiniest on TV and Facebook, then the value of my vote equals zero. However, it is valuable to the system. No government in all of history has ever survived without at least the tacit consent of the majority—no king, no republic, no dictatorship. “Voter turnout” numbers are part of a feedback loop of manufactured consent, which protects the system from either imploding under its own weight, or exploding in revolution.
By refusing to vote, I incrementally lower voter turnout numbers. More importantly to me, I preserve my unimpeached moral right to condemn a system which I do not endorse, do not consent to, and indeed, do not support in any way (except insofar as may be forced from me at the point of a gun, e.g. taxes). If I were to cast a vote, then I would be admitting that I think the system has at least some legitimacy. But I do not so think—thus I do not so do.
Refuse the system. Boycott the vote.
|
|
|
|
BitcoinTalk Username: nullius (#976210) Starting Post Count (including this one): 775 Current Rank: Member BTC Address: 38i2Ccc9miWr2ZyyactRJ8HcDLdYtnNkxd Note: The potential of a $5 bonus does not outbid my PGP keys, etc. Those who do not have paid signature ads may be more likely to actually use their signatures; thus, I suggest some option for an ad which could fit into one line, e.g.:[center][b]Do you think your posts are better quality than mine?[/b] [url=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3055616.0]Join [i][b]Joe's Signatureless Challenge[/b][/i][/url][i]![/i][/center]
PS I may have invited nullius to join  Indeed; thanks for the tip. But it took me awhile to figure out the required form. I’ve never done one of those before; it’s so confusing! |
|
|
|
Perhaps that may be because you fail to understand the explanation that no intelligent person would bother with repetitious back-and-forth over charges so nonsensical on their face as to be cartoonish. But put that aside. Didn’t you see the news? Lauda has confessed guilt on the substantial essence of all your charges!  Guilty; Feel better, now? Is your craving thus satisfied?Actually you are quoting a nonsense post by lauda Where’s the sarcasm shill with that fancy paid /s signature ad? I fear that I myself may be incapable of explaining this to Mr. Quickseller. But let me try: My quote provided exactly the answer your accusations are worth. It should also satisfy you, given how determined you evidently are to find Lauda guilty of something—no matter how nonsensical. Well, I suppose that Lauda must be guilty of something—behold the confession! Happy now? Everybody wins. Don’t thank me; I’m just happy to help. |
|
|
|
Through Tor—and this is not the first time I’ve had this problem: [...403 error...] For the downloads problem, if the downloads do not require you to be logged in, accessing the BCT server by its direct IP address and/or a DNS record that resolves to the IP should make it accessible, provided BCT hasn't blacklisted all non-CF IPs. For the website issue, how about 2FA, that could help the situation? As you know, anytime a CDN has your certificate, they can intercept your traffic if they choose. You could also make a login URL that is not routed through CF. I don't know how much hacking of SMF it would take to implement that. Actually, cloudflare might have a way to direct certain URLs to directly point to the backend (BCT) servers. I haven't messed with them in a while, since before they started doing their shared SSL service, so I'm not positive about this. On the other hand, this might not address the problem that putting in a CDN was designed to prevent. If the DDOS attacks were directed to the login URL it would then be vulnerable again. Thanks for the suggestions, Ben. Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, all of your suggestions would require action by theymos; there’s nothing there which I could do myself, as a workaround to obtain downloads right now. If there’s a legitimate public means to find a direct IP address, I’d appreciate being corrected here. But I rather suspect that theymos wishes to keep his real IP addresses unknown to DDoSers; and if I could find it, so could they. I have an inherent distrust of infrastructure services that I don't control, which is why I try to avoid CDNs. However, I have no website with as much traffic as BCT, so have never had to deal with that situation.
Same here. Specifically as to Cloudflare, in addition to how they sometimes cavity-search you with Javascript while still failing to keep the site reliably available, see e.g.:https://trac.torproject.org/24351As you know, anytime a CDN has your certificate, they can intercept your traffic if they choose.
Cloudflare intercepts all traffic (and modifies at least HTTP response headers), as a matter of course! My biggest complaint is that Cloudflare is a MITM attack against TLS on a substantial portion of the whole Internet. From the user end of things, I generally boycott Cloudflared sites insofar as practical. But I support the Bitcoin Forum, out of my respect for how theymos was honest with people when he was effectually forced behind Cloudflare by Internet arsonists: With regret, I am (for now) admitting defeat on the DDoS front, and we will soon be using using Cloudflare to protect against DDoS attacks. [...]
I really don't believe in willingly putting a man-in-the-middle in your HTTPS like this, [...]
I especially dislike Cloudflare, which I'm almost certain is basically owned by US intelligence agencies. [...]
The Internet is seriously flawed if everyone needs to huddle behind these huge centralized anti-DDoS companies in order to survive...
The security implications are that Cloudflare can read everything you send to or receive from the server, including your cleartext password and any PMs you send or look at. They can't access the database arbitrarily, though: they can only see data that passes over the Internet.
To get a gauge on what independent, no-MITM DDoS protection can require for a(n extremely) high-profile target, I found Protonmail’s experience interesting: https://protonmail.com/blog/ddos-protection-guide/The attack faced by ProtonMail was highly sophisticated and unfortunately required extraordinary effort to defeat. In the next section, some technical details of the attack against us are discussed. In defeating this attack, we were able to benefit from strong in-house technical expertise, along with a partnership with IP-Max, the leading networking experts in Switzerland. Defending against large scale DDoS attacks remains an expensive undertaking. Below are the typical costs for this type of DDoS protection: Networking equipment: $30’000 BGP/GRE DDoS Mitigation (per year): $50’000 $100’000 Dedicated IP Transit (per year): $20’000 Maintenance Overhead: $10’000+ ( N.b. that I don’t trust in-browser Javascript crypto which is downloaded separately for each session, and thus cannot be in any way verified and kept at a “known good” version. That would be most dangerous for targeted attacks. Moreso for a service which offers no alternative, as would allow people to choose according to their own security needs. I’m not endorsing Protonmail by linking to them for other reasons; do your own PGP on your own hardware!) For an easier limited workaround on theymos’ end, ChipMixer had an excellent suggestion upthread: The security implications are that Cloudflare can read everything you send to or receive from the server, including your cleartext password and any PMs you send or look at.
Is there an official .onion proxy of BitcoinTalk that bypass Cloudflare? We do sometimes get support request PMs. How about BitcoinTalk Pro accounts with monthly payments, private proxy without Cloudflare and captchas, bot access? Though I would be concerned about the affordability of an ongoing subscription, an official .onion proxy would solve many problems. I may even offer to help with such a project, depending on what would be required of me. See my reply to ChipMixer upthread.
Why no bitcointalk forum coin with ICO
You earn coins by posting, and devs & sysadmins are paid with it?
Everything is creating tokens and ICOs... Even without value...
This place here is valuable!
Decentralise the Forums!
That would mad, the whole point of this forum is to have the public have a balanced or neutral stance in the cryptocurrency community. Creating a token or ICO for BTCtalk is effectively the same as losing net neutrality in the CC industry. And congratulations, Phash2k reinvented Steem. This sort of nonsense reminds me of one of the earliest posts to which I awarded merit. It spoke of how DHTs... ...get invoked in ignorance to every distributed systems problem because they're the first distributed systems tool people have heard of (sadly, "blockchain" is seems to be stealing this role), much as "neural network" has infested lay understanding of machine learning, or perhaps in other times "XML" was treated as a magical solution for inter-working serialization in places where it made little sense.
No, the problem will not be fixed by sprinkling some magical blockchain pixie dust on it. |
|
|
|
I remember the first time I ever spoke to a Japanese person. Our conversation turned to global politics and society; whereupon he said, “Why are so many Americans fat? We don’t have such fat people in Japan.” Seriously, USians, that is your international reputation. Most funny furrin’ folks are simply too polite to tell you to your big-mouthed fat faces.
America is not so much a big country, but more like a big business. There is a lot of money to be made in obesity for a lot of people and companies: healthcare, pharma, sugar, hfcs, fastfood, supermarkets etc.
It's in America's interest to keep people fat, keep prisons full, keep hospitals full, charge people for as much as they can, and fleece them out of their money. Of course everyone has to keep up the pretense that the opposite is true, and many may even believe it. But ask yourself this: do you trust their words or their actions?
One historical reason is the effectiveness of lobbying by large food conglomerates and other corporations, which heavily influenced the development and accuracy not only of dietary advice and how it was communicated, but also produced lopsided incentives for dietary research. Similarly, product packaging and food advertisement standards are generally more lax in the United States than elsewhere, and the social tolerance of markets and corporations is perhaps also greater.
One piece of the puzzle: Processed vegetable fats are far cheaper to produce in the first instance than animal fats. Furthermore, they are more shelf-stable—thus, friendlier to long BigCorp supply chains. Alleged health “experts” who tell you that canola (rapeseed) or soy oils are “healthier” than butter or lard mean only that they are healthier for distribution logistics involving large warehouses and many middlemen. Hydrogenated vegetable oils will blow you up whale-sized, and give you heart disease. Implications are left as an exercise to the reader.
Because MC is everywhere and MC is life! I'm from Europe and people there getting more fat too.
Cultural imperialist weaponry. If America doesn’t bomb your country to rubble, they will invade it with McDonald’s and other anti-culture. They want to take over the world, and are too fat and lazy to maintain their stockpile of atomic weapons. Americans are also very lazy and they just pay a few bucks to get finished meal, than cook meal by yourself.. ???
Well, it would be impractical for everybody to cook individual meals every time they needed to eat. This raises the atomization of society—worst in America, and accelerating with each generation. Moreover, it raises the division of labour. The latter inevitably leads to discussion of sex roles. To date, I have met exactly one American woman under the age of 40 who excelled in the kitchen, and genuinely enjoyed cooking for others. And she was not fat! Actually, she was a bit too skinny. ( N.b., the kitchen was not the only place where she excelled.)
very controversial
OK
I've read a study about people getting fat is because they don't just eat MCdonalds but simply because they are happy. Americans are not all fat but most of those that are unhappy people are skinny - Studies shows that when a person is not a jolly as some, they end up growing with the wrong crowd and not so happy.
Translation: Grinning idiots.
If you're tall enough to stand out in a crowd, you're probably aware of your tallness – maybe even self-conscious about it. But imagine that you're in a room full of basketball players. Suddenly, you don't seem so tall anymore.
Forsooth, the American cow is oblivious amidst its herd. So too in every other way.
First of all both women in the picture have no class or style showing off their private parts like that. When you're going out make sure your pants are the right size! :D
Killjoy. (At least as to the one on the left...) It's not the fat that's making you fat, however that sounds. It's mostly carbohydrates that give you energy which you are unable to burn. The math is very simple: you consume 2000 calories a day and burn 2200 = you're getting lighter and thinner. Also, you need fats to be healthy, it's just that fried food tends to have more calories in the same size meal, so people lose control of how much they're eating.
Actually, it’s not so simple. Different foods are metabolized differently. I eat a diet heavy in meat and dairy fats, very low in sugar, moderately high in complex carbohydrates. On that, I am anything but fat. But if I were to eat a McBurger-and-soda diet measured at a nominally equal number of Calories, then I have no doubt that I would blow up like an American. (Technical aside: Lowercase-c “calories” is the base unit; uppercase-C is actually kcal. Use the uppercase C in these conversations.) |
|
|
|
Quoting from another thread: Here you go: https://bitcointalk.org/merit.txt.xzSimilar to trust.txt.xz, it'll be updated weekly. It will show only the last 120 days of data; someone else should archive the old ones if you want them. Through Tor—and this is not the first time I’ve had this problem: $ wget -S https://bitcointalk.org/merit.txt.xz
--2018-03-04 14:59:20-- https://bitcointalk.org/merit.txt.xz
Resolving bitcointalk.org (bitcointalk.org)... 104.20.208.69
Connecting to bitcointalk.org (bitcointalk.org)|104.20.208.69|:443... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response...
HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2018 14:59:41 GMT
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Connection: close
Set-Cookie: __cfduid=d96a5721469bb369ae9866953b833f0d91520175581; expires=Mon, 04-Mar-19 14:59:41 GMT; path=/; domain=.bitcointalk.org; HttpOnly; Secure
CF-Chl-Bypass: 1
Cache-Control: max-age=2
Expires: Sun, 04 Mar 2018 14:59:43 GMT
X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN
Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=2592000
Expect-CT: max-age=604800, report-uri="https://report-uri.cloudflare.com/cdn-cgi/beacon/expect-ct"
Server: cloudflare
CF-RAY: 3f65354a2c56729b-AMS
2018-03-04 14:59:23 ERROR 403: Forbidden.
I have had the same problem with PGP keys and the trust database. Even right-clicking to save images from within a browsing session oft (inconsistently) results in a Cloudflare 403 HTML file, apparently due to some weird quirks in how Tor Browser interacts with Cloudflare’s control-freakiness. I request a workaround or solution for this general problem. (Note: “VPN” is a non-answer.) |
|
|
|
|
P.S., on a personal note:
One reason why I’m fascinated with recursive compressor cases is that I myself once invented a lossless recursive compressor which would work on any data, even random data.
I was dumbfounded at my own brilliance! I knew that what I had just done was mathematically impossible.
Since I knew that it was mathematically impossible, I painstakingly double-checked myself before telling anyone else. Of course, I found that I had made a severe error in logic. My invention would not work, could not be made to work, would never work. It was actually quite stupid, albeit in a seductive “gotcha” way similar to those comedic paradoxical “proofs” that 1=2.
Oops. So much for my dreams of backing up the entire Internet on a 5.25" floppy. There goes my Fields Medal. I chucked it into /dev/null, and life went on. (I also resolved to triple-check any other brilliant ideas I conceived late at night, while more than slightly drunk.)
For the record, I have also invented a perpetual motion machine. But for that, I have the excuse that it happened when I was about four years old.
|
|
|
|
Was that before or after she asked nullius to donate to TPB? Not that it matters much though.
Was that a question about the mystical judgment of the cosmos, as expressed through random events? I am a certified cult leader; thus, I am qualified to speak on such matters. This degen thing explains some aspects of alia's increasingly desperate scam attempts and the belligerent rants after getting caught.
Alia, you have told me privately of some studies in psychology. Therefrom, you should realize that you are not immune to the vagaries of human nature; and if you’re smart enough to master the difficult task of truly objective introspection, then you will realize that this is a textbook example of a gambler obsessed with discovering a secret way to win. You’re far from the first or the last; and the result is always the same: This is exactly what I meant here: This is how (almost) all gamblers turn their profit into a loss, and then start "chasing losses", which is a great way to lose more money. Do you really think casinos would still exist if if would be possible to consistently beat them?
The long list of positive returns seemed very unlikely to happen, and this makes it a lot more likely. What alia is doing is basically Martingale: if you lose, you do the same with a much higher bankroll. You can keep doing that, until you run out of bankroll. [...] I've seen many gamblers bust large amounts of money thinking they're invincible.Whereupon I think this is a good step in the right direction: I was wrong about the script. It may have made money but I'm sure that was just dumb luck. I shall exit this thread and this account with my head bowed down in shame! Well, at least I could help tpb
I'm not sure if it's sarcasm or you really mean it, but I'm confident it's the right decision. I've seen many gamblers bust large amounts of money thinking they're invincible. I don't mean it, but I'm sure I will some day. i'm just deluded right now. Only reason I said that was because I promised I would. Props to nully for the donation Whereas this is not—and it is inevitable over the course of time: Still at it:  Edit: busted at 1x:  No, I’m not enjoying that. Get out now!I think you have sufficient intelligence to understand what is happening here, if only you will be sufficiently objective in your examination of your own actions. I do realize that true objectivity toward oneself, objectivity from within, is a rare ability and impossible for most people (as well as being almost a tautological contradiction). But you have been repeatedly shown, by people who do not hate you personally, that you are indeed “deluded” (at least in the colloquial sense). Now, those charts really drive home the point. I don't mean it, but I'm sure I will some day. i'm just deluded right now. Only reason I said that was because I promised I would. Props to nully for the donation
Props to you for a tentative indication that you might actually admit you’re wrong here. Admit it first to yourself—that’s oftentimes the hardest part. Yes, I’m also sure you “will some day”. But it would be better now—rather than someday after you’ve irreparably ruined yourself financially and in other ways, such as with reputational (and worse) consequences somewhere other than an Internet forum. You could totally wreck yourself with this stuff, IRL, all around. And you know it. |
|
|
|
Edit: Fix typo (s/to/by/); post archived:https://web.archive.org/web/20180304043503/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3044369.msg31526121#msg31526121
Lmao I was clearly being sarcasting about the 21m btc thing.
Fine, if nullius donates exactly 0.00673625 of the profit that I gave him to 3HcEB6bi4TFPdvk31Pwz77DwAzfAZz2fMn (the Pirate Bay donation address) then I'll state that I am a loon, I was wrong and stupid to thing I had a profitable script, and I will admit defeat to all my haters.
Done. (Before I started writing this post.) And if my friend takes me up on my offer, then this is money out of my pocket. I’m not you, Alia. txid: b1f07dc051f2f34c2c2c0bb458e5a865d1b6e7c3c888fda8a0740200682c2d76 LockTime: Block 511907 Confirmed: Block 511908I far overpaid the fee in hope of a fast confirmation in hopes that without undue delay, I could post this as confirmed.The txids of our transactions were disclosed by me before, so people can trace this throught the blockchain: Per my standard procedure, I requested that all info (addresses, amounts, etc.) be handled with PGP encryption. I want at least one tiny shred of blockchain privacy. However, I think after this, I will need to thoroughly anonymize this coin anyway. (And if you wonder where it came from: Thorough anonymization. Knock yourself out looking.)
txid for 0.01101346 BTC sent nullius → alia:
554962af97ea469ade363e4f6e402de37e9270a242e81b45c5dfa7b21e8fcc0b
txid for 0.021 BTC (exactly) received alia → nullius:
44e3aeed8ba068f52e048d76776205bcee05902af7db1eecbd697e7ac819c1ec
I took about a zillion archives from that thread, so that may already be up on archive.org somewhere; and I will promptly archive this. Also, I request that somebody please quote me here. The only reason why I let you pick the charity was that I had already intended to donate to TPB after LoyceV pointed out their “BCH: Bcash. LOL” stance. I only didn’t do it before, because I really don’t have the money to spare. This thread is self-moderated, because it seems sure to be a troll magnet. When it comes to trolling, I like The Pirate Bay's stance on Bitcoin Cash: 
That said, I agree with suchmoon. And I am leaning back toward the theory that you sincerely believe in, and are obsessed with your script. Take a break. Please.
That is bullshit. You really could not believe that there is any level of sincerity left in alia about this financial poverty story.. a script that supposedly can make you rich, but you are employing such script while being in a state of desperation. S/he/it already shown enough sophistication in thread posts and does not believe that crap. S/he/it is only blowing smoke about some fictional script, and if s/he/it gambles using such supposedly existing script, then s/he/it deserves to lose whatever remaining finances that s/he/it is betting on these kinds of nonsensical plays. We are getting past any kind of empathy stage and into the absurd, no? Sure, some of the alia claims are funny, but you really cannot be taking any of them seriously, at this point, right? Empathy? I’m on record as being so strongly in principle against empathy [see midway through post] that I’ve been accused of psychopathy. I replied by dropping Nietzsche on all the bleeding hearts. You may rest assured that I am not motivated by “empathy” for Alia. (I also have another polemic in my drafts box against empathy. Too much forum drama. Too much distraction.)
Now, again: How about that audit?
|
|
|
|
You were so close to the truth: There are only two users on this forum: Quickseller and Lauda. Everyone else is a sockpuppet of one of those two.
(And the two cases of sockpuppet can be clearly differentiated based on intelligence.) |
|
|
|
So, as you ready to take RGBKey up on his offer of an independent audit?
Jeez... you don't get it do you? Auditing means giving the script for free. Not interested. Multi-billion-dollar software companies entrust their proprietary source code to independent auditors. Do you really think your precious script is more valuable than that? Now, I repeat: Alia, you yourself made this an issue:Like I said, many, many times... not everything has to be 100% math based. My aim is to make profit for people, and I am doing it. That is my end goal. Not to fit your stupid equations (which are not even relevant since you don't know the intricacies of how my script works)
If your ultimate answer is that your critics lack sufficient knowledge to judge your script because they haven’t seen it, then it is incumbent on you to grant such knowledge.You can’t have your cake and eat it, too, by claiming that secret knowledge overrides the known laws of mathematics, refusing to let anybody else examine it, and then claiming to “prove” that your script works based on statistically, scientifically invalid experimentation performed in an unverifiable manner.Really, this secret knowledge is beginning to take on a quasi-mystical edge.
Wait and fucking watch, you braindead scumbag. I will make 21,000,000 BTC within the next 24 hours.
You sound unhappy. Maybe you should take a break from gambling. No. I will win all the bitcoins in existence. Even satoshi's coins. You will ALL SEE The precise amount of total Bitcoin which will ever exist is 20,999,999.9769 BTC, the final satoshi of which will be mined with block 6,929,999. Thus, that must be some magical script you’ve got if you will win 21,000,000 BTC within the next 24 hours, including Satoshi’s coins. It involves time travel, and also cryptographic breakage of all private keys required to release all UTXOs, including those controlled by burn addresses. Magic! That said, I agree with suchmoon. And I am leaning back toward the theory that you sincerely believe in, and are obsessed with your script. Take a break. Please.
The aim of this thread is to prove everyone wrong and thus salvaging my reputation
You will not be able to prove everyone else wrong, because you are wrong and they are right. You would do much better for your reputation if you were to admit you’re wrong, and learn something. I admit when I’m wrong—which is exceedingly rare, but it happens. The aim of the script is to make profit for investors and myself. I have not done mathematical audits and I know for a fact the script will fail if you run it for too long. But in the short term is is very profitable. Plain and simple
Wait. I thought you weren’t selling it now— right?Please do realize, nobody here is personally concerned with proving you wrong. The motive of people arguing with you in this thread is to make sure that nobody else loses money by buying or investing in a mathematical impossibility. If you were claiming something wacky which could not foreseeably cost others money (as Jude Austin with his alleged address collision), then I would have shrugged and gone away by about midway through page 2 of this thread. For my part, I don’t have time for more than casual debunking of such things.
Also, all of my major investors have withdrawn from the script program and I'm in a really bad state financially. I'm requesting those who made profit from my script to donate a portion of the profit to me. @nullius you made 0.01 btc profit from me, so sending a little piece back in my time of need would be really appreciated. If you don't want to do it that is okay too
I’ve already offered to give the equivalent amount (in local fiat 0) to a dear friend of mine IRL who was abandoned by her husband, and has struggled with multiple jobs to feed her young children while trying to somehow also take care of them. Much though I’ve been able to console her loneliness some nights, I am in no financial position to really help her the way she really needs it—even if she’d let me. I’ve been waiting to hear back. She’s busy; and from prior experience trying to slip her enough cash for some groceries, I know that she is prickly about being treated as if a charity case. If she refuses it, then I will probably donate it to the GPG project or similar. I don’t want to profit from this affair.
0. Nobody IRL knows that I do Bitcoin.
Also, I did not want to discuss the details of our transaction; but since you raise it: You told me that you initially lost all my money. You said you covered it with your own funds, then recovered, won, and split the profit with me. Beforehand, when you told me that you would not set a stop-loss as I requested, you said (of your own initiative) that you would instead insure my funds; but you did not say that insurance included continued gambling with a split of profits. FWIW / at face value: The story is, I lost your initial deposit, so I loaded 0.1 BTC of my own to make it back. Now I'm 0.2 BTC in the green, withdrew a bit of profit, and playing with house money, so thank you xD gpg: Signature made Fri Feb 23 06:35:49 2018 UTC
gpg: using RSA key 857D1532A793AAAA0247DE92CED5586964477E72
gpg: Good signature from "Alia <...>"
Primary key fingerprint: 857D 1532 A793 AAAA 0247 DE92 CED5 5869 6447 7E72
|
|
|
|
@gmaxwell, thanks for the explanation of the holdup issue and how to work around it with secret sharing. I also appreciate the idea of hashing private keys, thus exploiting participants’ self-interested need to keep them absolutely secret early in the protocol. In the interim between my above posts (2018-02-08), I was pondering another idea. I frankly don’t know whether it’s a sound idea, or half-baked; so I kept it up my sleeve whilst mulling whether it’s even worth a mention. Due to a sudden interest I have in provably fair gambling, I will now give it a shot. Who knows—perhaps I may want to found my own gambling site, and make of myself Bitcoin thousandaire. The hash the last block's ID approach can be biased by miners.
I’m usually a critic of Satoshi’s use of double-hashes. But here, I think it can really come in handy: Use the inner hash as the source of a public pseudorandom number which is infeasible to influence or predict in advance.Zeroth iteration of the idea: Breakage requires a partial preimage attack on the input to another partial preimage attack. My gut tells me that this is one of those ideas which is either ingenious, or trivially stupid. (Aside, is double-SHA256 fully baked into silicon in available current-generation mining hardware? Or can it be programmed to return both the inner and outer hashes? If the former, then add the cost of making your own ASICs in calculating the real-world cost of attack.) If that does not suffice, next iteration: Hash (or HMAC) the inner hash together with a different predefined nonce such as a counter. E.g., for the hash at block height h, use: HMAC_SHA256("I always win!" || (uint32_t) h, block_inner_hash). Or hash the inner hash together with pseudorandom material from a different source, such as a popular altcoin blockchain with a different PoW. E.g., hash this intermediate state from a Bitcoin double-hash together with some intermediate state from an Equihash. Aside: Of course, the inner hash can be kept secret by the generating miner whilst its commitment (the outer hash) is baked ever-deeper into the blockchain. This can probably be useful for some other purpose. I always approach such ideas by placing myself in the role of an attacker. For simple use of the block hash as suggested by others, I understand that if the attacker wanted to influence m bits of the hash in addition to the n bits of needed zeroes, the cost of the attack is 2 m+n hashes. I posit that to influence the inner and outer hashes simultaneously (“zeroth iteration”), the cost would again be 2 m * 2 n = 2 m+n hashes. That is why I am trying to tie the inner hash to something else, and/or use the inner hash as an input for another hash which also depends on other independent inputs. I seek some way to substantially raise the cost above 2 m+n hashes. There may be some means to exploit the irreversibility of the outer hash, which I have not yet thought of.The goal seems obvious, but I must state it clearly for the sake of clear argument: How could it be made infeasible for the miner to influence the result whilst also managing to create any Bitcoin blocks at all? (Much less without impractically high risk of orphans?) I know I did plenty of handwaving above. Ultimately, I’d seek to pin it down to something with a rigorously characterized 128-bit security level (or higher). N.b., I’d be as fascinated to see this idea attacked and shot down as I would be to find out that it’s a brilliant insight. Thanks.
(Notice: I independently conceived this idea on 2018-02-08; and I am first publicly disclosing it today, as of the timestamp on this post. I will promptly archive-snapshot this post, so as to provide at least a modicum of prior art evidence in case it’s a good idea and some idiot runs to file for a patent on it.)
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
?
