Bitcoin Forum
October 24, 2017, 02:41:44 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
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 38 39 40 »
  Print  
Author Topic: ...  (Read 59354 times)
mercistheman
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 380


View Profile
August 27, 2015, 10:23:32 PM
 #561

As it appears that XT is inevitable it would be nice get a better understanding of the migration path to XT or effects of staying firm with the core... anyone care to make some rough projections?
1508812904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508812904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508812904
Reply with quote  #2

1508812904
Report to moderator
1508812904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508812904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508812904
Reply with quote  #2

1508812904
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508812904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508812904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508812904
Reply with quote  #2

1508812904
Report to moderator
1508812904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508812904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508812904
Reply with quote  #2

1508812904
Report to moderator
VirosaGITS
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


Want to save $? Use Coupon Code VOFF5 at GPUShack


View Profile
August 27, 2015, 10:25:58 PM
 #562

As it appears that XT is inevitable it would be nice get a better understanding of the migration path to XT or effects of staying firm with the core... anyone care to make some rough projections?

Inevitable how? XT isn't happening, so there's not much projections to make. The BIP100 which probably has the most support right now is not likely to come to pass either for quite a while.

Ethereum Mining Calculator - Simple, elegant, mobile-friendly Ethereum Mining Profitability Calculator
gpuShack mining hardware - Your one stop shop for all GPU mining related hardware! Use Coupon Code VOFF5 to save on any order.
ethOS - #ethosdistro on freenode - linux distro that mines Ethereum out-of-the-box.
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408



View Profile
August 27, 2015, 10:42:10 PM
 #563

As it appears that XT is inevitable it would be nice get a better understanding of the migration path to XT or effects of staying firm with the core... anyone care to make some rough projections?

XT is being run by a few hobbyists who dream of a State-sanctioned utopian PanoptiCoin, free transactions and ice-cream forever ... it will always be niche belief system but not accepted by the mainstream.

canth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
August 27, 2015, 10:45:26 PM
 #564

As it appears that XT is inevitable it would be nice get a better understanding of the migration path to XT or effects of staying firm with the core... anyone care to make some rough projections?

Inevitable how? XT isn't happening, so there's not much projections to make. The BIP100 which probably has the most support right now is not likely to come to pass either for quite a while.

Agreed, nothing is inevitable.  In terms of block size increases, BIP 101 has the lead from industry (~9 significant companies that have signed on) while BIP 100 has the lead from miners. Neither are a sure thing and neither are dead in the water. What does seem rather unlikely is no block size increase within the next 18 months. I'm confident that users, miners and industry will put enough pressure on any reluctant devs that this won't be a plausible outcome.

https://scalingbitcoin.org/ -> It's not called BitcoinIsGoodEnough.org for a reason.

canth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
August 27, 2015, 10:47:18 PM
 #565

As it appears that XT is inevitable it would be nice get a better understanding of the migration path to XT or effects of staying firm with the core... anyone care to make some rough projections?

XT is being run by a few hobbyists who dream of a State-sanctioned utopian PanoptiCoin, free transactions and ice-cream forever ... it will always be niche belief system but not accepted by the mainstream.

Throwing around insults to get people to listen to you - how's that been working so far?

marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408



View Profile
August 27, 2015, 11:42:26 PM
 #566

As it appears that XT is inevitable it would be nice get a better understanding of the migration path to XT or effects of staying firm with the core... anyone care to make some rough projections?

XT is being run by a few hobbyists who dream of a State-sanctioned utopian PanoptiCoin, free transactions and ice-cream forever ... it will always be niche belief system but not accepted by the mainstream.

Throwing around insults to get people to listen to you -

It wasn't intended as an insult, merely bringing enquiring minds up to speed with the state of play in the real world. People who are delusional can be easily offended by truthiness I know.

meono
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
August 28, 2015, 12:55:59 AM
 #567

As it appears that XT is inevitable it would be nice get a better understanding of the migration path to XT or effects of staying firm with the core... anyone care to make some rough projections?

XT is being run by a few hobbyists who dream of a State-sanctioned utopian PanoptiCoin, free transactions and ice-cream forever ... it will always be niche belief system but not accepted by the mainstream.

Throwing around insults to get people to listen to you -

It wasn't intended as an insult, merely bringing enquiring minds up to speed with the state of play in the real world. People who are delusional can be easily offended by truthiness I know.

You should take your own advice.

Atleast grow some balls to admit your attempt to insult was a fail.
Swimmer63
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484



View Profile
August 28, 2015, 02:28:40 AM
 #568

My list of people to ignore has grown exponentially from this thread.
canth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
August 28, 2015, 02:33:10 AM
 #569

As it appears that XT is inevitable it would be nice get a better understanding of the migration path to XT or effects of staying firm with the core... anyone care to make some rough projections?

XT is being run by a few hobbyists who dream of a State-sanctioned utopian PanoptiCoin, free transactions and ice-cream forever ... it will always be niche belief system but not accepted by the mainstream.

Throwing around insults to get people to listen to you -

It wasn't intended as an insult, merely bringing enquiring minds up to speed with the state of play in the real world. People who are delusional can be easily offended by truthiness I know.

So everyone that runs XT or disagrees with you is delusional, eh? Reading the bitcoin mailing list gives me all the personal attacks and divisive community behavior I need but at least there are some technical points mixed in with the antisocial rants. You can guess the button I'm clicking next.

JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
August 28, 2015, 02:33:26 AM
 #570

I don't think it's helpful to refer to both the existing protocol and Mike's 8 GB block limit monstrosity both as "Bitcoin". It makes discussion difficult. When I talk about "Bitcoin" I mean the system we currently have, in which there is a blocksize limit of 1 MB. That Bitcoin is the own which doesn't see the invalid blocks.

Well, sorry, that is religion, not science or engineering...

Quote
The number of miners accepting invalid blocks doesn't matter. Their blocks will be rejected anyway unless you're running the XT fork.

Big blocks will be rejected only by players running BitcoinCore (or some other small-blockian software).

Quote
Quote
The longest valid chain accepted by Core *is* the longest valid chain, by definition.

Of course not; that is the longest valid chain *only for Core*.  For implementations that accept bigger blocks, bigger blocks are (of course) valid, so the longest valid chain may be a different one.

And for implementations of dogecoin, dogecoin blocks are valid. What's your point? For Bitcoin core, 2 MB blocks are invalid no matter how many miners mine them.

That is exactly my point: the word "invalid" is meaningless by itself.  Things are valid or invalid only according to some standard, software, person etc.  2 MB blocks are valid for all clients and miners who are running any version of the Bitcoin software that accepts them.

Quote
The [Litecoin] software forked, not the blockchain.

No, Litecoin's blockchain started with its own Genesis block on 13 October 2011.  There is no block that is shared by the two chains.

Quote
It will not be easy to use the two chains independently, because all transactions are in principle executed on both chains.  (That is another reason why they cannot be called "altcoins".)  Only transactions that spend coins mined after the fork will be executed exclusively on the same branch.

The XT chain will quickly become polluted with outputs which are invalid on the BTC chain. "Taint" from coinbases generated only on the XT chain will fan out.

Yes; just as any transaction that uses utxos tainted by coinbases of blocks in the small-block branch will execute only on the small-block chain. 

But only sophisticated users will know that, and only they would be able to exploit that feature to work with each coin independently.  (How would you get your own pre-fork coins tainted that way?)

Quote
Quote
Have you read BIP101? It proposes jumping the blocksize limit to 8 MB next year, and then doubling of the blocksize limit every 2 years, for 20 years. That gives us 8192 MB blocks in 21 years. And that's what the sane bitcoiners should want?

Sigh, it wlll NOT give 8 MB blocks next year, nor 8 GB blocks 21 years from now.  Those are block size LIMITS.  Bitcoin had a 32 MB block size LIMIT for almost 2 years at the beginnig, but teeny weeny block SIZES.  In fact it had a 1 MB size LIMIT since then, and yet the average block SIZE is still 0.45 MB.

I wrote "limit" twice in the sentence you are complaining about.

Indeed you did, but then you concluded that BIP101 "gives us 8192 MB blocks in 21 years".  It surely will NOT, just as Satoshi's original implementation did not give 32 MB blocks in 2009, and the reformed one did NOT give 1 MB blocks in 2010. 

Quote
If the block SIZEs ever get close to 8 GB, it means that the traffic is 15'000 times what it is today, which ma mean a user base of hundreds of millions.

No, it doesn't. Any miner can create a full block by generating their own transactions for free.

And why would he do that?  Why didn't miners create 32 MB blocks in 2009, or 1 MB blocks since 2010?

Bigger blocks take longer to propagate and have a slightly higher chance of being orphaned.  There is no advantage for a miner to pad his blocks, and a slight disadvantage.

Moreover, a miner who, for some reason, wished to fill his blocks to the limit cannot broadcast his spam to the network, because some other miner could mine it and take the fees.  But then everybody will realize that those extra 7.5 MB is spam that he created himself.  Then his peers, even without explicit agreement, could decide to ignore his blocks and orphan them.

Quote
But I do agree that BIP101's schedule is stupid: it is silly to plan parameter changes several years in advance, when no one knows even whether bitcoin will survive to next year.

Good. Then please stop arguing in its favour. The sooner it dies, the better. We need to reject this and find a proper solution.

I do not argue in favor of BIP101.  A substantial increase in the block size limit before the end of the year is obviously necessary to keep bitcoin working, as it has so far, for a few more years.  Any software that does that will do. 

However, it seems that the only way that will happen is through software that is not controlled by Blockstream.  People who care about bitcoin's future should try to become independent from the BitcoinCore version.

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
August 28, 2015, 02:39:17 AM
 #571

ANYONE can create a transaction that is valid only one chosen branch with any wallet! They don't need to be clever bitcoin hackers.

Can you say exactly why the transaction would be valid only on that branch?

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
RoadStress
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610


View Profile
August 28, 2015, 04:23:11 AM
 #572

ANYONE can create a transaction that is valid only one chosen branch with any wallet! They don't need to be clever bitcoin hackers.

Can you say exactly why the transaction would be valid only on that branch?

Well it seems that you are not paying attention to the threads where you post on.

In this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1157679.0 we have the following information:

A fork occurs. There is demand for coins (and mining occurring) on both chains. So, we have two surviving block chains (for whatever period of time).
You will then have 1 XTcoin and 1 traditional bitcoin.
You can then taint one of your coins with coins which only exist on one of the forks. Let's say you get a few satoshis from block reward which occurred in a XT 8mb block (thus is not valid and does not exist on the 1mb chain). You can combine those satoshis with your 1 XTcoin by sending them to a new address under your control. This means your XTcoins can be safely moved separately from your traditional bitcoins.

If you don't taint your coins first, any transaction you make will be valid on both chains, so if you send your coins to an address which is not under your control, the holder of the private keys for that address will be able to get both your XTcoins and traditional bitcoins.
There is no risk for you, until you make the decision to taint your coins on one chain, and then exchange them for something of value. You will hold coins on BOTH chains until you take these actions. Even the tainting itself does not incur any risk for you. It simply allows you to craft transactions on each chain which is no longer valid on the other chain.

It's not rocket science and it's not a hack. It's just how bitcoin works!

iCEBREAKER is a troll! He and cypherdoc helped HashFast scam 50 Million $ from its customers !
H/w Hosting Directory & Reputation - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622998.0
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


View Profile
August 28, 2015, 04:31:49 AM
 #573


The XT chain will quickly become polluted with outputs which are invalid on the BTC chain. "Taint" from coinbases generated only on the XT chain will fan out.

Yes; just as any transaction that uses utxos tainted by coinbases of blocks in the small-block branch will execute only on the small-block chain. 

But only sophisticated users will know that, and only they would be able to exploit that feature to work with each coin independently.  (How would you get your own pre-fork coins tainted that way?)

Everyone will know it either before any fork or very shortly after.  I've described the formula several times to spur people's interest in learning the basics of how spends are created.  Hopefully a few people will have taken and interest and took the 5 minutes it takes to understand this, and many more will be aware that it is a TODO before they get ripped off by on-line service providers or dodgy SPV client apps.

I chronically overestimate people's abilities, but I am quite sure that this stuff is simply not rocket science.  Someone will have written some code to auto-split coins well before it's needed (if they've not already) and if they don't, I'll start coding again for the first time in a number of years.  IIRC, some of the same techniques were employed to either exploit or work around exploits associated with the mutability issue.


JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
August 28, 2015, 11:48:37 AM
 #574

Well it seems that you are not paying attention to the threads where you post on.

It seems you have not read what I wrote at all.


You can then taint one of your coins with coins which only exist on one of the forks. Let's say you get a few satoshis from block reward which occurred in a XT 8mb block (thus is not valid and does not exist on the 1mb chain).

Of course I know that.  But how do you get those few satoshis?

Do you realize that 99.99% of the bitcoin holders will NOT know about that bug feature of the protocol, or would not have the means or interest of exploiting it? 

So how are you going to meet the 0.01% of users who know that, have got some coinbase satoshis from one of the branches, and are interested in trading single-branch bitcoins? 

By the way, there is a minimum delay of 50 blocks (IIRC) before one can use coinbase coins, presumably to discourage this sort of hackery.  On a branch with 25% of the mining power, that means at least 2 days. Wlll that branch survive that long?

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2240


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
August 28, 2015, 03:11:58 PM
 #575

Well stating the obvious that I'd be surprised if anyone who thinks they know anything about bitcoin wouldn't know ...
1) Coincontrol ... how long has it been in the core qt? ...
2) 101 confirms
3) BIP100 is now 60% (without Bitmain's 2 pools) ... yeah, XT BIP101 will not be happening ... with still less than 1% Tongue
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pools?resolution=24h

and the guy at Bitmain who we discussed and came up with the /BIP100/ identification will probably convince them to add it soon too ... hopefully Smiley
... hmm close to 80% then ...

Well nothing left to talk about in this thread ... no need to look at and skip all the failed expert lectures any more ... ... sayonara ...

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
canth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
August 28, 2015, 03:23:56 PM
 #576

Well stating the obvious that I'd be surprised if anyone who thinks they know anything about bitcoin wouldn't know ...
1) Coincontrol ... how long has it been in the core qt? ...
2) 101 confirms
3) BIP100 is now 60% (without Bitmain's 2 pools) ... yeah, XT BIP101 will not be happening ... with still less than 1% Tongue
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pools?resolution=24h

and the guy at Bitmain who we discussed and came up with the /BIP100/ identification will probably convince them to add it soon too ... hopefully Smiley
... hmm close to 80% then ...

Well nothing left to talk about in this thread ... no need to look at and skip all the failed expert lectures any more ... ... sayonara ...

1) BIP100 is miners voting for miners to maintain control. Hardly shocking.
2) There's no code. It's a little early to call this game over.

Even if 100% of miners vote for BIP100 that doesn't make it assured - users and merchants need to accept it or it's back to the drawing board.

Yerm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126



View Profile
August 28, 2015, 05:52:27 PM
 #577

if i just wanted to store my coins is bitcoin core a good option? i currently have them in coinbase but people tell me thats not safe
canth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
August 28, 2015, 06:06:56 PM
 #578

if i just wanted to store my coins is bitcoin core a good option? i currently have them in coinbase but people tell me thats not safe

This is not the thread for security. The short answer is that if you have reasonably good secure computing habits and a modest level of your personal wealth in bitcoin, it's best to secure them on your laptop or phone with a paper backup in a safe place. If you don't have good security (aka, letting other people use your computer, not keeping it up to date, installing random software off the internet, browsing pr0n, etc) you're better off keeping your coins on coinbase and using 2FA.

If the amount of coins you hold would be 'life changing' if you lost them, invest in a Trezor, Case, KeepKey (not out yet) or use Armory and a dedicated offline laptop.

As far as regular wallets on a desktop are concerned - core or XT are fine. Electrum is an alternative light SPV client if you don't have ~ 50GB of free space.

RoadStress
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610


View Profile
August 28, 2015, 11:46:01 PM
 #579

Of course I know that.  But how do you get those few satoshis?

Do you realize that 99.99% of the bitcoin holders will NOT know about that bug feature of the protocol, or would not have the means or interest of exploiting it? 

So how are you going to meet the 0.01% of users who know that, have got some coinbase satoshis from one of the branches, and are interested in trading single-branch bitcoins? 

Well the same way you get satoshis right now. You either mine yourself or find someone that can provide you with them.

If you think 99.99% of the bitcoin holders will NOT know about that then you are lying to yourself. I do agree that there will be some that will not know about this, but 99.99% is an absurd percent. Also it's not a bug. It's a feature. It's how the system works. It seems that you still don't understand it.

By the way, there is a minimum delay of 50 blocks (IIRC) before one can use coinbase coins, presumably to discourage this sort of hackery.  On a branch with 25% of the mining power, that means at least 2 days. Wlll that branch survive that long?

It's 100 blocks, not 50. And it's not a hackery. It's how the system works! Is that so hard to understand?

Also you don't need to taint the coins from the 25% branch if a hard fork happens because you already have coins on that branch. You will need to taint coins on the other branch that has 75% because on that branch you need tainting. Are you drunk?

iCEBREAKER is a troll! He and cypherdoc helped HashFast scam 50 Million $ from its customers !
H/w Hosting Directory & Reputation - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=622998.0
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
August 29, 2015, 01:01:21 AM
 #580

So how are you going to meet the 0.01% of users who know that, have got some coinbase satoshis from one of the branches, and are interested in trading single-branch bitcoins?  

Well the same way you get satoshis right now. You either mine yourself or find someone that can provide you with them.

Yeah, that seems quite easy. Why didn't I think of that? [/sarcasm]

Quote
If you think 99.99% of the bitcoin holders will NOT know about that then you are lying to yourself. I do agree that there will be some that will not know about this, but 99.99% is an absurd percent.

Estimates of people who own some bitcoin range from 3'000'000 (Coinbase, BCI claims) to 300'000 (me).  The latter is my estimate of how many people own at least 1 BTC; together, those users own 99% of all bitcoins in existence.  

So, how many bitcoiners do you think know enough about the bitcoin protocol to understand how they can get get their transactions executed in one chain only; and know how to do that without messing up their wallet file; and can obtain a few satoshis that were mined after the fork; and are interested in handling split coins; and can find buyers who can also do all of that; and are dumb enough to buy coins that may die in a few days?

To help you: Reddit's /r/bitcoin section lists 172,115 subscribers, but less than 1000 are logged in at any time.  However the moderators of /r/bitcoin delete most posts about BitcoinXT, so I doubt that its readers will learn about that there.  There are new sections for bitcoiners who dislike censorship and for people interested in BitcoinXT; they have ~2000 and ~12'000 subscribers, respectively.  

My most optimistic guess is that the "market" for minority-branch coins will not exceed 300 people, worldwide.  There is of course a network effect there:  once they realize that they are so few, they will realize that their chances of making money from coin splitting are small, and they will lose interest -- and then there will be fewer still...

Quote
Also it's not a bug. It's a feature. It's how the system works. It seems that you still don't understand it.   It's 100 blocks, not 50. And it's not a hackery. It's how the system works!

Yes, I have observed already that, for the fanatic bitcoiner, *every* detail of bitcoin is a feature; and *everything* that happens is "how the system works".  

Sorry, but it is a bug that the coins on each branch may or may not be moved independently, with most clients being unable ot understand or control what is happening.

Hackery is what you propose to do: move coins independently on the two branches by tainting them with coinbase coins, and sell the version you think will die to anyone fool enough to buy them, or to anyone naive enough to not understand what he is buying.   The 100 block delay was probably meant to discourage that kind of hackery after forks -- soft, hard, or accidental.

Quote
Also you don't need to taint the coins from the 25% branch if a hard fork happens because you already have coins on that branch. You will need to taint coins on the other branch that has 75% because on that branch you need tainting.

Correct.  More precisely, any UTXOs that were created before the fork exist and can be used on both branches.  If you try to move them without tainting, they will be moved on both branches, to UTXOs that are still untainted.  Once you get hold of some satoshis that were mined on one branch (either one), you can first move all your old UTXOs on that branch to new UTXOs, with tainted transactions, and then you can move again the same old UTXOs to still other UTXOs with untainted transactions, that will be executed only on the other branch (because on the first one those outputs are already spent).  

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
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 38 39 40 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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!