Oh wow, not bad! Looking at how A1 is planning on accepting AliPay and WeChatPay as well later this month [1] it's quite interesting that they are spearheading with crypto first. For now it appears to be only a pilot project running in some of their retail stores however, so paying your phone bill with Bitcoin is not in the possible... yet. [1] https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000107558893/a1-shops-nehmen-kuenftig-auch-bitcoin-an (German only, sorry) |
|
|
|
I think this article assesses the situation fairly well. Hosting data that has the potential be converted into illegal content is not the same as hosting illegal content itself. The Bitcoin blockchain is just transaction data. There's no image or media files unless you willingly extract them. |
|
|
|
- IOU's are informal contracts, that have a reputation for being easy to break
- Lightning channels are contracts too, but they're enforced by the Bitcoin blockchain. You can't break these contracts
Well put. I think a lot of misconceptions regarding LN stem from mistaking the latter for the former. They seem to believe that LN smart contracts are governed by laws similar to legal laws (ie. a social construct based on trust and thus easily broken) while the laws smart contracts are governed by are more akin to the laws of physics. |
|
|
|
The evolution of Bitcoin mining could make a nice section. From early 2010 PCs over specialized GPU mining rigs to the very first ASICs. Add a FPGA setup and ASICMiner USB sticks to break things up a bit. Maybe a timeline including relevant milestones for a short intro on the history of money. From early barter to grain as money in early Mesopotamia (including the first ledgers [1]) to coinage to medieval banking [2] to fiat money to cryptocurrencies. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_accounting[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking |
|
|
|
for the guys that say all wallets dont have limits , your wrong . im using a local wallet that has thier own limit . there is a limit for cash in and there is also a limit for cash out . also if im not mistaken i have also use a different wallets on the past and they also have thier limits . the only way to increase your accounts limit is by doing a kyc .
I'm sorry to say, but in that case you're not using a wallet but an exchange that pretends to be a wallet. Or rather, it may be a wallet, but it's not your wallet. It's the exchange's wallet. It's not your wallet unless you and you alone control the private keys. At which point you neither face limits nor KYC procedures. |
|
|
|
Thank you for yours answered! I'm wonder if Bitcoin Qt has also use a seed phrase?
I’m pretty sure Bitcoin Qt/Core never supported seed mnemonics. Back in the old days you actually had to backup its wallet file constantly to get the new generated private keys (after some spending transactions). Yep. Bitcoin Core didn't contain a HD (Hierarchical Deterministic) wallet until 2016: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8035Before this implementation Bitcoin Qt didn't derive its addresses from a seed but at random (hence why you had to regularly backup your wallet file). |
|
|
|
If you want to create actual tokens rather than just paper wallets I think Counterparty [1] and Omni [2] are what you are looking for. Both run on the Bitcoin network; Omni most famously known for Tether (USDT) and Counterparty probably best known for... ahem... Rare Pepes. I'm not sure how alive either of these projects still are though. As far as LN is concerned you probably still have to wait for the likes of RGB [3] to enter the stage. [1] https://counterparty.io/ [2] https://www.omnilayer.org/[3] https://github.com/rgb-org/spec |
|
|
|
ANYONE KNOWS WHICH WALLET I CAN SEND AND RECEIVE BTC WITHOUT LIMITS?
EVERY WALLET CAN SEND AND RECEIVE BTC WITHOUT LIMITS. THERE IS NO TRANSFER LIMIT WITH BITCOIN. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT. THE EASIEST WALLET TO GET STARTED IS PROBABLY ELECTRUM. DOWNLOAD IT FROM ELECTRUM.ORG. AND WHERE I CAN BUY BTC WITHOUT LIMITS ...
LIKE 500 BTC IN ONE DAY ,IS THAT POSSIBLE.
WHEN PURCHASING 500 BTC IN ONE DAY YOU PROBABLY NEED TO GET IN TOUCH WITH EXCHANGES DIRECTLY. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY FOR EXAMPLE BITFINEX.COM OFFERS OVER-THE-COUNTER TRADING THAT ALLOWS FOR SUCH AMOUNTS. THEIR REPUTATION HAS BEEN RATHER MIXED LATELY SO MAYBE GET IN TOUCH WITH COINBASE.COM OR KRAKEN.COM INSTEAD. EXPECT A THOROUGH VETTING AND VERIFICATION PROCESS. WHEN HANDLING SUMS OF THAT SIZE CONSIDER PURCHASING A HARDWARE WALLET FIRST THOUGH. EITHER BUY A LEDGER NANO FROM LEDGER.COM OR A TREZOR FROM TREZOR.IO. |
|
|
|
|
What's your cold storage set up? Are you using Armory, paper wallets, something else entirely...?
It's kinda risky to move coins to cold storage without knowing how to get them out again.
|
|
|
|
|
I think its lacking ease of use is LN's largest detriment. Even on-chain payments still seem like rocket science to many people, despite having come a long way from just a few years back.
I'm fairly positive though that we'll get there eventually, just like wallet software improved over the years. With more and more users getting familiar with cryptocurrencies and LN ease of use improving we'll end up somewhere viable sooner or later. We still have a long way to go though.
Once we're there though -- which is probably still years from now, so the developer community will need a long breath -- liquidity, routing, etc likely won't be a problem anymore.
|
|
|
|
To extend on Ryutaro's quote regarding HD wallets: Imagine these wallets like a tree -- which is where the "hierarchical" part comes from. Each leaf is an address. Each small branch is a user account. Each big branch is a cryptocurrency. Each big branch grows from a trunk that grows out of a seed. In more technical terms, the seed is random binary data from where in the end every private key is derived from. As a user you will commonly see this in form of a BIP-39 mnemonic seed phrase: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawikiUsing this seed, the tree is "grown" according to BIP-32 and BIP-44: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0032.mediawikihttps://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0044.mediawikiWith each cryptocurrency branch having their own derivation path according to a coin type as registered and documented in SLIP-44: https://github.com/satoshilabs/slips/blob/master/slip-0044.mdNote that it is possible to generate the public keys and the corresponding addresses independently of each address' private key. This is usually referred to as a watch-only wallet and is necessary for security to allow for cold storage while still being able to automatically generate addresses. Also note that the actual implementation may widely differ from exchange to exchange. |
|
|
|
I have been using this wallet to store my Bitcoins for future trading and trust me this is a reliable and secure crypto wallet. Plus, this wallet provides you with multi-signature functionality which enhances the security.
Here is the link from where I downloaded the wallet: [...]
A newbie account promoting a previously unheard of crypto wallet without any reviews. Not suspicious at all. This is either a scam attempt or a thinly veiled attempt at intransparent social marketing. Either way not trustworthy. To any newcomers reading this: Do not follow the link above. Do not download the wallet posted above. Just because it's on the App Store, doesn't make it safe. Many people have been scammed by malware wallets on both iOS and Android. As far as cryptocurrencies goes, Apple's and Google's screening process is simply insufficient. Only use wallets with a good track record. |
|
|
|
Good luck to the applicants! It's funny to see how many people are applying without any history of meeting the criteria you've laid out.
It's almost as if people blindly apply without reading any of them... |
|
|
|
This is why transactions are "safer" with more confirmations, and many places require 6 confirmations before considering a transaction fully complete. A 1 block deficit would be relatively easy to overcome, whereas it gets progressively harder with each additional confirmation, as a 51% attacker has to start from a bigger deficit.
Note that in case of a 51% attack no confirmation count is safe for as long as the adversary holds the majority hashing power. 6 confirmations are the recommendation to achieve reasonable security for most cases, but in case of an actual 51% attack even 6 confirmations won't suffice. Check here for reference: https://people.xiph.org/~greg/attack_success.html |
|
|
|
Now you may say that if many stop mining Bitcoin, then the difficulty will readjust.
I mean, yeah, that's precisely what's going to happen so what's the deal? Some things are simple like that. There will always be a profitability equilibrium. |
|
|
|
|
I think with highly volatile assets such as cryptocurrencies it's wiser to invest smaller amounts evenly over a longer period of time than investing a larger amount in just one go.
Look up Dollar cost averaging (also known as DCA, as mentioned by Little Mouse). While it doesn't necessarily perform better than investing in bulk it definitely helps even out the ups and downs of the market and is thus a slightly safer approach (if there is anything like "safe" in crypto).
|
|
|
|
That's what he did, what I argue is that you cannot leave it to completely arbitrary numbers and expect the project to be a success. I doubt satoshi punched the keyboard and whatever numbers were typed that's what he used for total supply, block rewards and whatnot.
If for instance he decided to set the thing similar to Freicoin, which was inflationary and introduced the idea of "digital demurring", Bitcoin would have never caught up as a store of value, which coupled with the blocksize limitation, it would have been a failure. In fact, I suspect satoshi knew 1MB blocksize was set in stone years before it even was brought up by anyone else. The way I see it is that those things are "hard coded" in practice, but not mentioned in a explicit way. He was aware on the game theory that would unfold.
Fair enough. However I'm not sure whether satoshi expected the project to be a success to begin with  Arguably the jury is still out whether Bitcoin is a success. Sure it got nice purchasing power, but in the grand scheme of things Bitcoin is still little more than an experiment and cryptocurrencies have yet to grow up. For all we know deflationary digital currencies may be a dead end in the long term and inflation is the way to go after all. That being said, I absolutely agree with you that the first cryptocurrency to enter the stage had to be of limited supply. Otherwise it would have never appealed to the speculators and remained an obscure little toy for nerds and anarcho-capitalists. I'd even argue that the abrupt supply drops (ie. halvenings) as opposed to a steady decline in issuance played a major role in generating a hype cycle; with the duration of 4 years between each supply drop hitting a sweet spot of reminding people that Bitcoin is still alive and kicking just when they had forgotten about it (ie. the perfect recipe for FOMO). How much of it was luck or calculation is anyone's guess, but I think it's safe to say that satoshi had at least some intuition about which values to choose. Intuition is hard to put on paper though. To that extend Bitcoin might merely be an experiment to empirically verify the issuance parameters  I do believe that opting for limited supply was mostly a matter of principle though. After all Bitcoin was at least in part a response to the questionable monetary policies of the world's central banks and governments. |
|
|
|
My point is that you cannot separate the economic aspects from the proposed way of solving double spending with the whole PoW system as if you lived in a vacuum. In order for the project to be functional in the real world it would need to grow from the economic pov otherwise all the code would be useless, thus why both are interrelated and why I find it interesting that there are 0 mentions of it on the whitepaper.
Of course you can. I mean, that's precisely what satoshi did, isn't it? To be more precise, the specifics -- ie. currency rate and final supply -- of how currency issuance takes place is largely irrelevant. Arbitrary. An accidental property. Otherwise we wouldn't see so many diverse approaches at currency issuance rates which all achieve more or less the same. The only important bits are (a) that currency is decentrally issued and (b) that securing the network is incentivized. That's all that was needed to be mentioned at that point in time, so that's all there is: By convention, the first transaction in a block is a special transaction that starts a new coin owned
by the creator of the block. This adds an incentive for nodes to support the network, and provides
a way to initially distribute coins into circulation, since there is no central authority to issue them.
[...]
The incentive may help encourage nodes to stay honest. If a greedy attacker is able to
assemble more CPU power than all the honest nodes, he would have to choose between using it
to defraud people by stealing back his payments, or using it to generate new coins. He ought to
find it more profitable to play by the rules, such rules that favour him with more new coins than
everyone else combined, than to undermine the system and the validity of his own wealth.
|
|
|
|
What's the function of public and private key in cryptocurrency wallet?
Private keys allow people to sign messages. Very much like a person can sign a cheque, contract or credit card receipt. Public keys allow people to verify that a message has been signed with the corresponding private key. Very much like a bank, lawyer or credit card company can verify that you have signed aforementioned document by having a sample to compare it too. Unlike handwritten signatures cryptographic signatures can't be easily faked. So when Alice sends 5 coins to Bob it's just Alice signing a message with her private key saying that she sends 5 coins to Bob. While Bob doesn't have Alice's private key (otherwise he could pretend to be Alice), he has Alice's public key and so can verify that she can send these coins. For a deeper, more general look at Public-key cryptography, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-key_cryptographyCryptocurrencies are just one of many use cases of this sort of cryptography. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
