|
Be careful though, there seems to be a handful of scams out there as well. Best check here on the forums if they are legit before making use of any of the paid services. ViaBTC as mentioned by jackg is one of the more trusted ones.
Keep in mind that transaction acceleration only means that the mining pool that is offering the acceleration service will add your transaction to the next block they mine. If that particular pool is unlucky you might still have to wait for a few blocks until your transaction gets its first confirmation.
|
|
|
|
In addition to increasing the gap limit you could (1) keep track of the generated addresses in a separate database and use application logic to check for incoming / outgoing transactions or (2) send small amounts of coins just within your gap limit (e.g. if your gap limit is set to 100, you could reserve every 100th address for internal purposes and send a small token amount there to bridge the gaps).
Your wallet will need to keep track of every address starting from the first address up to the last address in your gap limit after the last address that received a transaction (that your wallet is aware of). Sending dust to every 100th address will be very expensive and will not save much in other resources because the number of fewer addresses your wallet will need to monitor will decrease only by the amount of the smaller gap limit. Good point! The intention was less about increasing performance but more about making absolutely sure that no balances are overlooked. However you're right in that it probably makes more sense to simply increase the gap limit as necessary. Unfortunately I couldn't find anything on how large you can sanely set a gap limit. Maybe you can set it to 100k and it works just as well. This will be a function of how many addresses your wallet can monitor without encountering performance issues. Are you aware of any benchmarks or do you have any practical experience regarding performance degradation caused by large gap limits? I'm genuinely curious as I'm lacking the intuition for this particular use case. In addition to increasing the gap limit you could (1) keep track of the generated addresses in a separate database and use application logic to check for incoming / outgoing transactions
keeping a list of all generated addresses is one thing although it could be simplified to one number i.e. the index of the last address you generated. monitoring utxos is the job of the wallet. You are of course correct about monitoring transactions being the job of the wallet, but OP was inquiring about an edge case where said monitoring may fail ie. balances in addresses beyond the gap limit. |
|
|
|
2. Yes, it is common to spend coin in multiple different addresses in the same transaction. You can either choose which addresses you wish to spend from (based on the inputs) or can let your wallet software choose automatically based on your preferences.
2. Is it possible to combine bitcoin from different addresses when withdrawing? Say there is one bitcoin in 1st address and there is one bitcoin in the 1,000,000th address. If I want to withdraw 2 BTC, will the wallet able to combine the bitcoin from two addresses in a single transaction?
yes and that's what a wallet does automatically. Caveat: A wallet will only do this automatically if the two addresses are within the gap limit. Otherwise it won't know the coins are there. In addition to increasing the gap limit you could (1) keep track of the generated addresses in a separate database and use application logic to check for incoming / outgoing transactions or (2) send small amounts of coins just within your gap limit (e.g. if your gap limit is set to 100, you could reserve every 100th address for internal purposes and send a small token amount there to bridge the gaps). Unfortunately I couldn't find anything on how large you can sanely set a gap limit. Maybe you can set it to 100k and it works just as well. |
|
|
|
As for the antivirus and since I am using Windows, I think it is enough to just use Windows Defender instead of any other third party applications that can be found on the internet. It would just make your system far more insecure. Is it not?
Some even say that any use of AV is completely unnecessary, but it is a matter of their choice. I don't see how using respectable AVs can make the OS more insecure? On the other hand, there are many objections to the W10 as the nightmare of privacy - and yet the WD is something that should be enough to protect your device? The problem with third party AVs is that they can introduce additional attack vectors. They have deep access to your system and in some cases MITM your SSL connections. Accordingly any vulnerability in your AV of choice can be all the more harmful. Obviously Windows 10 has its own problems. But by adding a third party AV you potentially add a liability on top of a liability. Just my 2 sats though. YMMV. |
|
|
|
I disagree with this view, competitions make countries specialized and become efficient. What you need is a free-market where goods and services can be traded with minimum restrictions. No need to create a government on top of legitimately elected governments, telling them to do stuff, etc.
A few things of note here though: 1) Introducing a common currency removed a lot of friction for exchanging goods and services within the Eurozone 2) The much hated normalization of product standards on EU level vs national level serves the same goal And most importantly: 3) EU representatives are democratically elected by the citizens of its member states |
|
|
|
The downfall of the euro The massive economic blow caused by the Covid-19 will, most likely, bring an end to the euro. This is something we all should acknowledge and prepare for. It will be the biggest financial earthquake ever, requiring some serious hedging and planning. We have outlined such practices in our Crisis Preparation series. https://gnseconomics.com/2020/04/21/the-downfall-of-the-euro/Counterargument: The Eurozone will likely recover faster than the US due to earlier and stronger measures combined with overall more stable healthcare systems. This will enable Eurozone countries to reboot their economies safer and faster than the US. My bigger fear is they'll use this crisis to create said Federation. EU member states are currently all drawing their own plans, closing borders as they please, while EU is grasping to remain relevant.
Losing euro will be expensive, but it's probably for the best in the long run. Unless you work at ECB of course, then you'll do whatever it takes to keep your job rescue the euro.
Yeah, an European Federation would be bad news but I doubt it will ever come to that anytime soon. The EU is going through too divisive times for such measures. Having grown up in a smallish EU country with both national currencies and the Euro, I absolutely don't want to lose the latter. There's just too much friction when hopping borders or doing business when every little country has their own little currency and the banks take their own little cuts whenever money moves to and fro. No thank you. |
|
|
|
Das Geld einfach auf ein ausländisches Bankkonto zu transferrieren reicht nicht um die Steuerpflicht zu verschieben. Oder glaubst du Amazon, Google und co würden sich sonst Firmenkonstrukte antun die sich über Irland, Luxemburg und die Niederlande erstrecken?  |
|
|
|
In the bitcoin wiki it says that the current network of testnet is Testnet3. People that had access to testnet2, still have it right? But their coins are useless.
In theory you should be able to access testnet2 by running an old Bitcoin client that has the testnet Genesis Block set accordingly: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1261303.0Not sure if there's much of a network left to sync with though, assuming network discovery even works. |
|
|
|
Kaggle ran a competition several years ago in which competitors had to create a model to predict the output of a pseudo-random generator. The prize was $1000 for the 37th place model (divided by the number of entries the team placed), and there were no other prizes. Thanks for the link, that's pretty funny and very educative. Them rewarding the price money to a completey arbitrary rank makes it even better and drives the point home quite well. there is a posiblility with a brute force attack's (theory) .The problem how many ASIC do you need for make it? More than you could physically fit on earth, requiring orders of magnitudes more electricity than human civilization will be producing in the foreseeable future. Also you'd need to design and build completely different ASICs then the ones that are currently used in mining. Calculating nonces is literally the only thing these ASICs can and ever will do. For any other purpose you'd need to build different oens from scratch. If you have the real tools you can make it because the problem is not the all posible combination is infinite .
If you have interstellar travel you can make it to every star in the Milky Way because our galaxy is not infinite. But for practical purposes it might as well be. |
|
|
|
Puritans may think otherwise but I see it as a win for crypto community. A good one to cherish for,
Yeah, I got mixed feelings about this one. Short to mid-term Bitcoin will definitely profit from this development, but long term that's going to be yet another snake to worry about. They'll do whatever is going to make the most profits and eventually this will conflict with the values of the Bitcoin community. |
|
|
|
the day we cross 9000 for the last time will be my personal holiday. Die vegeta, die!
It really feels like watching a DBZ episode at this point  |
|
|
|
How can a small shop survive in Manhattan,NY with a rent of min 5k per month ? i just can't figure it out ...
Apart from all the reasons mentioned above on how a small shop can survive with this kind of rent I feel there has been one thing left out: Many shops don't. Maybe it has always been that way but I feel that especially in the last few years there have been many articles and opinion pieces on this matter: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/dec/24/new-york-retail-shops-amazon-renthttps://www.citylab.com/life/2019/08/vacant-storefront-tracker-law-nyc-retail-rent-control/595294/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/new-york-retail-vacancy/572911/Additionally, just because you see a store renting a place doesn't mean they are doing well. Maybe next year they'll be gone again. There's a bit of survivorship bias going on in that you'll mostly remember stores that stick around, not the ones that have to close after a short run. Edit: While the stores in OP's screenshot have stuck around for the full available Streetview timeline (2009 - 2019) you can see a bit of fluctuation on the opposite side of the street (Referring to the locations of the curry place and the deli right next to it, also the nail saloon or whatever that was being replaced by Chase some time after 2013). |
|
|
|
User: hassancisse Copy: Blockchain technology explained
if this technology is so complex, why call it “blockchain?” At its most basic level, blockchain is literally just a chain of blocks, but not in the traditional sense of those words. When we say the words “block” and “chain” in this context, we are actually talking about digital information (the “block”) stored in a public database (the “chain”).
Original: If this technology is so complex, why call it “blockchain?” At its most basic level, blockchain is literally just a chain of blocks, but not in the traditional sense of those words. When we say the words “block” and “chain” in this context, we are actually talking about digital information (the “block”) stored in a public database (the “chain”). |
|
|
|
Zum Thema Diversifikation hab ich mal ein Zitat gefunden das meiner Meinung nach perfekt auf den Altcoin Markt zutrifft. Paraphrasiert weil ich die Quelle leider nicht mehr finde: Diversifizierung bringt nichts wenn der gesamte Markt fast nur Scheiße anbietet. Im Gegenteil, man erhöht nur seine Chance in die Scheiße zu greifen. (Das Original ist glaub ich weniger ausfällig :X) Zur Klarifizierung: Ich will damit nicht sagen das Alts kategorisch schlecht sind. Es gibt auch Alts die ich persönlich interessant finde. Nur in einem Markt der überschwemmt ist von nutzlosen Coins und Tokens -- mal im Ernst, es ist ja so -- ist der Kosten-Nutzen / Risk-Reward Faktor von Diversifikation meiner Meinung nach sehr fragwürdig. |
|
|
|
My knowledge regarding QC might be tiny but our sole purpose is to have teraflops of computing power. It could be coming from machine learning or i dont know some high tech stuff.
Except that the "sole purpose is to have teraflops of computing power" applies to neither quantum computing nor to machine learning in any meaningful way. The upside of quantum computing is not that it can compute more, but that it needs to compute less for a very specific set of mathematical operations. Machine learning is not enabling large amounts of computing power, it is enabled by large amounts of computing power. There are indeed ciphers and cryptographic hashes which quantum computing might deprecate, but SHA-256 is not one of them for lack of a quantum algorithm that would offer an advantage over classical computation. Maybe we'll find one in the future, but for now that would be pure speculation and absolutely unrelated to anything machine learning. Applying machine learning to essentially break cryptographic functions by understanding input-output correlations is a cute idea but pointless. If there's any correlation between input and output, than it's not a proper cryptographic function. |
|
|
|
Now since Quantum works by learning mechanism that is you give teach it some examples and based on which it can intellectually learn billions of inputs and outputs based on that data.
So one day it could happen that there will some meaning to these seeds based on mathematical calculations. It will need huge computing power may be 100's of teraflops at any given time but it could be possible to know what was done on that seed.
I hate to break it to you but you're mixing up machine learning with quantum computing. Those are two wholly different technologies based on fundamentally different concepts. To make matters worse, not even machine learning works as described above. Cryptographic hashes by definition output pseudorandom data. There's no pattern or bias to be found and accordingly nothing for a neural network to be learnt. |
|
|
|
Tether as a coin is fully transparent, but what's the point in having a transparent currency if it's centralized? The coin is transparent, but the company behind it isn't. Hence a pretty bad combination.
Exactly. Even worse, Tether as a coin may be fully transparent, but Tether -- as a coin -- is also completely worthless without assets backing it up. And unfortunately those assets are not transparent in any meaningful (ie. verifiable) way. |
|
|
|
Or can employees figure out GPS co-ordinates location of the server just by tracking the server public IP address?
IP addresses are assigned by centralized authorities: Both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses are generally assigned in a hierarchical manner. Users are assigned IP addresses by Internet service providers (ISPs). ISPs obtain allocations of IP addresses from a local Internet registry (LIR) or National Internet Registry (NIR), or from their appropriate Regional Internet Registry (RIR) Accordingly in most cases the rough geolocation of a public IP address can be fetched from public databases. On top of that government agencies can get in touch with the ISP managing the address space to which the IP address in question belongs and get all the information they need from there. They may not necessarily find out who was renting the server but they will find the datacenter, company or private individual to which the public IP address is assigned. |
|
|
|
It's just that spammers and general abuse fucked it up for the rest of us so that it has become unviable to run your own email server (ie. you can still run your own email server, but your emails will most likely end up in the spam folder).
Actually, that's not true. I am running my own mailserver and didn't have a single problem with my mails yet. None of them are marked as spam an all reach their destination without a problem. If you follow a few guidelines, like signing mails (DKIM), reverse DNS hostname being correct, SPF and DMARC, you are very well able to host your own mailserver without any mails being rejected or marked as spam. Really? That's pretty neat and gives me a little hope because most anecdotal experiences I've read have been rather sobering (e.g. important correspondence falling victim to the occasional company spamfilter). |
|
|
|
Thanks for the great time together guys, and thanks to DS_ and CM for this great opportunity to be part of it. Good luck to the new participants  I'll keep my sig for a while (for free) if DS_ don't mind. Thank you, it has been over a year since I am wearing the signature and I will wear it for free for some time.  Good luck to the new participants Godspeed to both of you, see you around! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
