Bitcoin Forum
October 20, 2017, 10:06:41 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Concerns about Ultraprune  (Read 10551 times)
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:10:02 AM
 #1

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=119525.0

This should not be taken lightly at all. They want to restructure the entire blockchain which could potentially break Bitcoin if implemented poorly and all the nodes accept it.

Push them not to implement this change into Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind until it has been tested for at least 6 months.
1508537201
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508537201

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508537201
Reply with quote  #2

1508537201
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:12:26 AM
 #2

Additionally, DO NOT ACCEPT a release of this kind until it has been tested for a long period of time regardless of calls for trust. This isn't a kangaroo court. This isn't Zion. This is Bitcoin, the money of a new age.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680



View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:14:31 AM
 #3

Additionally, DO NOT ACCEPT a release of this kind until it has been tested for a long period of time regardless of calls for trust.

I have never upgraded without at least a month delay.  Even if it's to deal with a 'critical' bug, I have just turned off my client and don't turn it on until others have had time to test it for me.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680



View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:17:25 AM
 #4

I can't see how that proposal would change the blockchain, it looks like it only changes how the blockchain is parsed locally.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:21:09 AM
 #5

I can't see how that proposal would change the blockchain, it looks like it only changes how the blockchain is parsed locally.

Well, I need to reword what I said. The following looks like it might need to change how blocks are verified and mined:

A small summary of the changes:
Instead of blk000?.dat, we have blocks/blk000??.dat files of max 128 MiB, pre-allocated per 16 MiB
Instead of a Berklely DB blkindex.dat, we have a LevelDB directory blktree/. This only contains a block index, no transaction index.
A new LevelDB directory coins/, which contains data about the current unspent transaction output set.
New files blocks/rev000??.dat contain undo data for blocks (necessary for reorganisation).
More information is kept about blocks and block files, to facilitate pruning in the future, and to prepare for a headers-first mode.
Two new RPC calls are added: gettxout and gettxoutsetinfo.


If we change how blocks are verified and mined, and that is done with a bug included, it could lead to massive damage for the Bitcoin network as a whole since verification is everything.

gusti
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1102


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:25:56 AM
 #6

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=119525.0

This should not be taken lightly at all. They want to restructure the entire blockchain which could potentially break Bitcoin if implemented poorly and all the nodes accept it.

Push them not to implement this change into Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind until it has been tested for at least 6 months.

Dude, will you whistleblow for every change the devs introduce from now on ? Bitcoin needs to evolve continuosly, though I'm very conservative and wish to keep their original virtues.

If you are really concerned about future changes, I suggest you either :

1) Learn programming and participate in the code auditing.
2) Pay for a third party auditor to do that job.

You can do #2 thru a "bitcoin auditing task force" and donations or something similar.



If you don't own the private keys, you don't own the coins.
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:32:31 AM
 #7

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=119525.0

This should not be taken lightly at all. They want to restructure the entire blockchain which could potentially break Bitcoin if implemented poorly and all the nodes accept it.

Push them not to implement this change into Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind until it has been tested for at least 6 months.

Dude, will you whistleblow for every change the devs introduce from now on ? Bitcoin needs to evolve continuosly, though I'm very conservative and wish to keep their original virtues.

If you are really concerned about future changes, I suggest you either :

1) Learn programming and participate in the code auditing.
2) Pay for a third party auditor to do that job.

You can do #2 thru a "bitcoin auditing task force" and donations or something similar.




It doesn't take a code audit to understand that changing the structure of the blockchain that will then be verified, which sets history for all Bitcoin holders, is a serious change that can go wrong.

"Anything that can go wrong will go wrong".
Rotsor
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 172


🌟ATLANT ICO: 7/09/17🌟


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:38:52 AM
 #8

This is not a protocol change, idiot.

Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 06:43:12 AM
 #9

This is not a protocol change, idiot.
It changes how the network operates and how some will verify the blockchain.
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 07:29:32 AM
 #10

My vocabulary may be off but I stand by my assertion that this could compromise the verification process of transactions.

I care not if the problem would be detected quickly. A problem brings instability to the ecosystem.

I vote for rigid conservation. This is not a experiment.
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 07:52:59 AM
 #11

Jgarzik is already having problems with this new build. His Bitcoins are not showing up under it.

http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2012/10/21

BUGS ARE IN THIS AS IS
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
October 21, 2012, 08:10:46 AM
 #12

You are unique atlas.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792



View Profile
October 21, 2012, 08:12:24 AM
 #13

Please, can everyone not just ignore this guy? I mean, really ignore him. Don't even open his posts (I only even bothered myself with this thread so that I could get this off my mind). It's the most blatant example of FUD trolling that I have witnessed so far. Watch me ignore him when/if he starts to reply to me (it won't be difficult to resist, as I'm not opening this thread again).

Simply by engaging with him (talking to him, opening his post such that it gets 1 more view count etc) makes it easier for him to do his "job". Make it difficult for him. Stop.

Vires in numeris
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 08:14:14 AM
 #14

Please, can everyone not just ignore this guy? I mean, really ignore him. Don't even open his posts (I only even bothered myself with this thread so that I could get this off my mind). It's the most blatant example of FUD trolling that I have witnessed so far. Watch me ignore him when/if he starts to reply to me (it won't be difficult to resist, as I'm not opening this thread again).

Simply by engaging with him (talking to him, opening his post such that it gets 1 more view count etc) makes it easier for him to do his "job". Make it difficult for him. Stop.

I have no incentive to troll. I have a great incentive to protect Bitcoin.
gmaxwell
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324



View Profile
October 21, 2012, 08:51:59 AM
 #15

They want to restructure the entire blockchain and protocol which could potentially break Bitcoin if implemented poorly and all the nodes accept it.
What the hell is wrong with you, a couple weeks ago you were calling the developers incompetent because the initial block download is not faster. Then it's made faster (on the order  of 6-40x faster depending on the user's hardware, as a result of months of work) and you start screaming about "restructure the entire blockchain and protocol"— neither of which are changed by this improvement. And you can't seem to avoid invoking Gavin, though his only role in this particular set of changes has been reviewing code.

Things were much better on the forum when you and your crazy foaming were banned.

Bitcoin will not be compromised
repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 08:52:41 AM
 #16

This is not a experiment.

I think even Satoshi himself would disagree with you on that assertion.

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 08:57:57 AM
 #17

They want to restructure the entire blockchain and protocol which could potentially break Bitcoin if implemented poorly and all the nodes accept it.
What the hell is wrong with you, a couple weeks ago you were calling the developers incompetent because the initial block download is not faster. Then it's made faster (on the order  of 6-40x faster depending on the user's hardware, as a result of months of work) and you start screaming about "restructure the entire blockchain and protocol"— neither of which are changed by this improvement. And you can't seem to avoid invoking Gavin, though his only role in this particular set of changes has been reviewing code.

Things were much better on the forum when you and your crazy foaming were banned.


When you change the file format of the blockchains files which are then used for transactions, an error in implementing said format change could lead to problems.

I am open to being wrong but the way I see it, this is significant.
Atlas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 08:58:35 AM
 #18

This is not a experiment.

I think even Satoshi himself would disagree with you on that assertion.
110 million dollars doesn't think so.
hazek
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 09:14:07 AM
 #19

Atlas I don't understand how storing data differently locally changes how this data is verified to be valid?

Also please slow down, or I'll be forced to start clicking the Delete this reply button.

My personality type: INTJ - please forgive my weaknesses (Not naturally in tune with others feelings; may be insensitive at times, tend to respond to conflict with logic and reason, tend to believe I'm always right)

If however you enjoyed my post: 15j781DjuJeVsZgYbDVt2NZsGrWKRWFHpp
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
October 21, 2012, 09:19:37 AM
 #20

This is not a experiment.

I think even Satoshi himself would disagree with you on that assertion.
110 million dollars doesn't think so.
then the people owning 110m$ of bitcoin, must take responsibility and make THEIR OWN client.

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves and wiser people so full of doubts." -Bertrand Russell
Pages: [1] 2 3 »  All
  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!