Bitcoin Forum
August 08, 2020, 06:24:39 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.20.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: How much of your corn do you plan on cashing out in the next massive bull run?
None - 22 (18.2%)
1-10% - 16 (13.2%)
11-20% - 15 (12.4%)
21-30% - 17 (14%)
31-40% - 6 (5%)
41-50% - 12 (9.9%)
51-60% - 9 (7.4%)
61-70% - 5 (4.1%)
71-80% - 4 (3.3%)
81-90% - 2 (1.7%)
91-99% - 3 (2.5%)
100% - 10 (8.3%)
Total Voters: 121

Pages: « 1 ... 22083 22084 22085 22086 22087 22088 22089 22090 22091 22092 22093 22094 22095 22096 22097 22098 22099 22100 22101 22102 22103 22104 22105 22106 22107 22108 22109 22110 22111 22112 22113 22114 22115 22116 22117 22118 22119 22120 22121 22122 22123 22124 22125 22126 22127 22128 22129 22130 22131 22132 [22133] 22134 22135 22136 22137 22138 22139 22140 22141 22142 22143 22144 22145 22146 22147 22148 22149 22150 22151 22152 22153 22154 22155 22156 22157 22158 22159 22160 22161 22162 22163 22164 22165 22166 22167 22168 22169 22170 22171 22172 22173 22174 22175 22176 22177 22178 22179 22180 22181 22182 22183 ... 27090 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 21785937 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (148 posts by 37 users deleted.)
bitserve
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1173


Self made HODLER ✓


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:15:45 AM
Merited by Hueristic (1)

Quote from: Hueristic link=topic=178336.msg48922722#msg4
Link to the thread?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080565.0

It's VB1001's first thread and it is having some interesting success.
1596911079
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1596911079

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1596911079
Reply with quote  #2

1596911079
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1596911079
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1596911079

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1596911079
Reply with quote  #2

1596911079
Report to moderator
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1962


Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:16:07 AM

Anything requiring physical access isn't scary.
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1962


Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:18:25 AM

Quote
If Klein put them into an encrypted wallet, it's likely no one will spend those coins until quantum cryptography begins freeing them up.

Coins mined in the first two years of bitcoin's existence are not safe from quantum attack.

I have long said that Satoshi's bitcoin are a quantum canary. Once we see them begin moving, we will now that someone in the world has a functioning advanced quantum computer.

It's just too big a prize not to be the first thing that you do with a QC. I would even expect governments employees to try this if they had access.

If, on the other hand, we see all Satoshi coins move at once, that means someone has the private key.

Because Satoshi kept each 50 BTC distribution from his mining in a separate wallet. And even QC takes a lot of time to crack even those early wallets. Months or longer I would expect.

The other possibility is that someone with a QC could crack wallets and then not move the bitcoin, waiting to move it all later. But this is unlikely because they must fear that someone else is attempting the same thing and could beat them to the punch if they wait.

So, if we see say 5 or 10 Satoshi wallets move all at once, then that should also be considered a QC event as well. 10 wallets, randomly chosen from the Satoshi blocks, would not be a huge risk to wait to move.

The point in waiting is that the minute a Satoshi block moves, the market will react very negatively, because we can expect those coins to be freed up and reach the markets, bringing the price down.

So, whoever first has a QC and begins targeting bitcoin, they will move those coins and sell them quickly.

Then the sh!t will hit the fan.

I wonder how the devs will react then. Should we move to lock down those early coins so they cannot be stolen? Historically the devs have opted against such things.

hmmmmm

Meh.  Its about time we had some QC FUD.  I have been missing it. 
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1657


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:18:45 AM

They lost the main architect on their mining chips if I remember it right, they took forever to get this last miner out and I would say the enemies are at the gate as efficiency comes, and those wanting to mine drops.

Fuck Bitmain and their wanting to be king of crypto they wanting their antcoin or whatever it was called and then gave up to join btrash.

Fuck em.

He's their competition now. Smiley




Quantum resistance is a complicated question on so many levels we probably are not even foreseeing all the angles it can effect. Are there Devs specifically tasked to contingency plan for this?



Anything requiring physical access isn't scary.

True that.

Quote from: Hueristic link=topic=178336.msg48922722#msg4
Link to the thread?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080565.0

It's VB1001's first thread and it is having some interesting success.

thanks +1 sM
bitserve
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1173


Self made HODLER ✓


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:19:45 AM
Last edit: December 28, 2018, 03:29:50 AM by bitserve

I don't see it scary. I have always assumed that anyone having physical access to my hardware wallets and some resources to spend to reverse engineer the content of the memory chip would end having access to my private keys. The cost is probably higher than my Bitcoin stash.... but not yours. Anyway, don't fucking let anyone else to have physical access to your hardware wallets?

The other vulnerabilities seem to reside on the possibility of you trusting a hardware wallet which firmware has been tampered with. Again, doesn't scare me. I know my firmwarez, yo.

That being said, for VERY HIGH amounts, you could just use an offline PC *AND* a hardware wallet that is never connected to an online PC. Sign the tx, Carry it to an online computer via USB and broadcast it to the network with ANY software wallet (ie Electrum). Can't get much safer and paranoid than that.

For 100+ BTC stashes I would surely be doing that.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1657


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:25:17 AM

i used to be a somebody Sad

Ha, I just put that on 2 days ago!






all I need is this theymos

Brooke my rule you made me Lol. +1sM
Arriemoller
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 823


Justitia arma requirit


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:29:26 AM

Getting too old for electronic diffs, too old for lightning browser plugins, too old for millions wasted on disposable toys that go jolly fast and obliterate muh environment, too old for one weird company's blockchain shoved down at me from space.
There's a fucking war on.
These fuckers should all rally round designing and producing the only things that matter: chips free from govt control, miners that go jolly fast and obliterate only the tip of muh environment, software that is not as bloated, shonky and illegible as JJG's 'Memoirs and Musings: My Bookywook (volumes 1 thru 34)(part I)' and then and only after that, vehicles that are useful for the coming world with no roads and no electricity, a wealth of fallout, guns, bandits and finally, vast open spaces free at last from the the poor, the stupid, the hungry.

Well, at least the poor, the stupid and the hungry seems to be disappearing, it's of course the same people.
They are hungry because they are poor and they are poor because they are stupid. Stupid people won't get well paid jobs, if they get any at all.
I read somewhere that the increasing average IQ in the world, the Flynn effect, is not because we are all getting a little smarter for every generation, nor is it because we are getting more of the really smart people. It's actually because we are getting fewer and fewer dumb people in the world for every generation.
To put it bluntly, the losers aren't finding any mates, and thus do not procreate, thereby not spreading their stupid genes to a new generation.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1657


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:32:22 AM

Can't say that I understand this shit either but it's nice to see such a good fudder get swatted. Cheesy

and ignored for future reference.

firstly trying to get mempools synced is meant to be about if everyone has the same tx set before a pool mines a block, then all that needs to be sent as a confirmed block is the headers and list of txid's. thus reducing the data needed to be sent when a confirmed block is created.
Our work is not related to making "mempools synced", though they are naturally similar.

Our work is exclusively related to eliminating the massive overheads from relaying transactions the first time through as they go around the network.
 
Quote
to then suddenly need to grab hundreds of transactions from X and hundreds of tx from Y AGAIN
That doesn't happen in the Bitcoin protocol, no one has proposed for it to happen, and it isn't needed.

It's really a shame that people are forced to waste their time correcting you simply because you are so persistent and voluminous in your inaccuracies that you manage to confuse many people even though your posts are not very convincing.

Quote
i do find it funny that it was these very same devs that wanted a fee freemarket by removing a fee priority mechanism to make individualising mempools, that are now seeing the flaw in it..
Your statement here makes no sense.  Nodes prioritize transactions by feerate, none of that has been removed.  The only "individualizing" in practice is that a low memory host might reduce their mempool size. This is, in any case, totally unrelated to removing the relay inefficiencies.

Quote
but allowing nodes to relay tx's and drop them due to "fee free market" but then have to interrogate nodes to list their entire mempools(actually causing more bandwidth) and pick up the tx's AGAIN(more bandwidth again).. is silly..
Again, Bitcoin nodes don't interrogate nodes to list mempools nor pick up transactions again, no one has proposed they do, because there is no reason to do that.

Just pre-empting another confused tangent: There is a "mempool" p2p message which was added to the protocol by bitpay for the purpose of surveilling the network under a dishonest justification, which was later realized to be a privacy problem and the privacy leak was removed (and after that bitpay's staff recommended removing it from the protocol).  Bitcoin Core has no ability to send a mempool p2p request and never has had the ability to do so. It might be interesting to do so at initial startup to quick start the mempool and give miners something to mine after being offline for a while, but at the moment no one is working on that, AFAIK.

Quote
they all initially did get 1,2,3,4,a,b,c,d at initial relay..

The problem we are addressing is that if you have 100 peers, each of your hundred peers will advertise (or have advertised to them) each of those 8 transactions, using 100x the bandwidth on those advertisements as if you had only one peer.

Quote
the solution is much more simple.. get rid of the free market that lets nodes drop tx's in the initial relay. thus they would ALL have them all first go-around. without having to interrogate EACH connected node, after dropping.. because their would be no drop in the first place.
The need for nodes to potentially drop transactions has nothing to do with free market behaviour and everything to do with nodes not having infinite storage to keep the transactions.  But there is, again, no interrogation-- they don't need to go refetch them again.

Quote
X)now the first node has to ask the third node for the list.. 1,a,b,c,d (more data than initial relay)
y)now the first node has to ask the third node for the missing.. d (more data than initial relay)

You've misunderstood what we've accomplished here.

If at some point during the initial relay of transactions,  you receive from your other peers TX  A, B, C, D, E, F  and I get TX B, C, D, E, F In the historical Bitcoin protocol each of those 6 values would be sent across the link between us (potentially twice).

Instead, you could send me the single value X = A xor B xor C xor D xor E xor F,  or I could send you the single value Y = B xor C xor D xor E xor F.  

After the single value is exchanged whomever received it computes  X xor Y = A -- the missing transaction, even though neither of us knew in advance which transaction was missing.

Minisketch generalizes this to support any number of differences.  The data sent is exactly equal to the number of different values, regardless of how big the original sets are. (In fact, the first value in a minisketch is exactly what I described above: the xor of all the elements in your set).

So, if you have received in relay A, B, C, D ... X  and I have  already received B, C, D ... X, Y, Z;   Then I need send you only three values (or you me): The xor of all my values, the xor of all my values cubed, and the xor of all my values to the fifth power... and then you will know that I am missing A from you, and you are missing Y, Z from me.  And by doing this we send only three values on the link between us in the initial relay instead of 26 - 52 (depending on how much duplication there is from concurrent sends).

Quote
by getting rid of the "free market" and getting back to a consensus fee priority formulae/structure that everyone follows means
There has never been and can never been a "consensus priority formula", because priority by its very definition is external to consensus.  But the behaviour of existing nodes is consistent-- they keep and drop the same transactions, subject to having them in the first place, and subject to the restriction that anything configured to use less memory obviously can't keep as much.

Quote
to then not need to re-interrogate nodes and re-relay transactions.. then you will get to conect to 16-24 nodes as oppose to 8. and no need extra bandwidth and commands/sums playing around.
There is no re-interrogation, no-rerelay in Bitcoin, nor is any proposed.  It exists only in the imaginary protocol that you spend your days attacking and confusing people with.  The inefficiency in Bitcoin that we're working to resolve exists in the initial relay itself, and would still exists even if nodes had no mempools at all.

kingcolex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 1248



View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:35:13 AM

This shit is sorta scary, yo.

https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9563-wallet_fail

In this presentation we will take a look at how to break the most popular cryptocurrency hardware wallets. We will uncover architectural, physical, hardware, software and firmware vulnerabilities we found including issues that could allow a malicious attacker to gain access to the funds of the wallet. The attacks that we perform against the hardware wallets range from breaking the proprietary bootloader protection, to breaking the web interfaces used to interact with wallets, up to physical attacks including glitching to bypass the security implemented in the IC of the wallet. Our broad look into several wallets demonstrates systemic and recurring issues. We provide some insight into what needs to change to build more resilient hardware wallets.

Hardware wallets are becoming increasingly popular and are used to store a significant percentage of the world’s cryptocurrency. Many traders, hedge funds, ICOs and blockchain projects store the entirety of their cryptocurrency on one or very few wallets. This means that users of hardware wallets store tens of millions of euros of cryptocurrency on small USB peripherals that costs only a few euros to manufacture. Moreover, many users that trade and speculate in cryptocurrency interact, update, and generate transactions using their hardware wallets on a daily basis.

In this talk we look at the good, the bad and the ugly of hardware wallet security: We will walk through the different architectures of the wallets, look at the different attack vectors and talk about the challenges of building secure hardware before diving in deep finding vulnerabilities in the different wallets.

The vulnerabilities we will present range from vulnerabilities that can be fixed in a firmware upgrade, to bugs that will require a new hardware revision, up to attacks on the microcontrollers themselves, requiring new silicon to be fixed.

Some of the (most entertaining) vulnerabilities will be demonstrated live on stage.

Most of these require having the device in hand, that's not a big deal, even to opening the device and soldering shit. If your device takes a walk you should be able to get a pi 3 at target a fresh Micro sd card there as well load a raspbian and a fresh wallet software check the Signature and load your seed before anything happens.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1657


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:35:24 AM

Getting too old for electronic diffs, too old for lightning browser plugins, too old for millions wasted on disposable toys that go jolly fast and obliterate muh environment, too old for one weird company's blockchain shoved down at me from space.
There's a fucking war on.
These fuckers should all rally round designing and producing the only things that matter: chips free from govt control, miners that go jolly fast and obliterate only the tip of muh environment, software that is not as bloated, shonky and illegible as JJG's 'Memoirs and Musings: My Bookywook (volumes 1 thru 34)(part I)' and then and only after that, vehicles that are useful for the coming world with no roads and no electricity, a wealth of fallout, guns, bandits and finally, vast open spaces free at last from the the poor, the stupid, the hungry.

Well, at least the poor, the stupid and the hungry seems to be disappearing, it's of course the same people.
They are hungry because they are poor and they are poor because they are stupid. Stupid people won't get well paid jobs, if they get any at all.
I read somewhere that the increasing average IQ in the world, the Flynn effect, is not because we are all getting a little smarter for every generation, nor is it because we are getting more of the really smart people. It's actually because we are getting fewer and fewer dumb people in the world for every generation.
To put it bluntly, the losers aren't finding any mates, and thus do not procreate, thereby not spreading their stupid genes to a new generation.

That does not correlate my observations albeit they are from a significantly small pool of only people I have had contact with in life.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1657


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:39:27 AM

tomorrow will be a new session of BTCpoker ... 8 session then payout
hope to be lucky and to see some good action cards...

non stop sit & go's ... four way and HU looking forward Wink

I want to see a shot of you at the final table!

Just got back and got smoked the last 2 days (every fucking flush against me got there!). Cheesy
jojo69
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 2480


no FOMO


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:41:31 AM

Quote
redacted for brevity

hmmmmm

Meh.  Its about time we had some QC FUD.  I have been missing it. 

I don't think the author is fudding.  I don't know how many qbits it would take to make an attack on early addresses feasible, but those qbits are certainly coming eventually.

I think the idea of Satoshi's coins as a quantum DEW line is interesting indeed.
Ibian
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1278



View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:47:31 AM

toxoplazmosis
A fascinating thing. But from my understanding, in rodents it makes them attracted to cat urine. It's humans that it makes aggressive.
bitserve
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1173


Self made HODLER ✓


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:47:36 AM

Quote
redacted for brevity

hmmmmm

Meh.  Its about time we had some QC FUD.  I have been missing it. 

I don't think the author is fudding.  I don't know how many qbits it would take to make an attack on early addresses feasible, but those qbits are certainly coming eventually.

I think the idea of Satoshi's coins as a quantum DEW line is interesting indeed.

Theymos was defending the idea to remove satoshi coins for the very same reason. Maybe we should ask him what his current stance on that subject is. I would think it is not a big concern for the next few years, but it will be sometime in the future.
bitserve
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1173


Self made HODLER ✓


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:49:50 AM

toxoplazmosis
A fascinating thing. But from my understanding, in rodents it makes them attracted to cat urine. It's humans that it makes aggressive.

Yes, that's why MSM dumbfully labels toxoplasmosis as "rodents not fearing cats". Rodents have a natural instinct to avoid any place where they detect cat pee. In my country house I used to spread the contents of the litter box all over the perimeter for that very same reason. It worked wonderfully.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1657


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:51:16 AM

Quote
redacted for brevity

hmmmmm

Meh.  Its about time we had some QC FUD.  I have been missing it. 

I don't think the author is fudding.  I don't know how many qbits it would take to make an attack on early addresses feasible, but those qbits are certainly coming eventually.

I think the idea of Satoshi's coins as a quantum DEW line is interesting indeed.

Theymos was defending the idea to remove satoshi coins for the very same reason. Maybe we should ask him what his current stance on that subject is. I would think it is not a big concern for the next few years, but it will be sometime in the future.

Breaking the golden rule of immutability will not come without cost.
It is a dangerous discussion that opens many doors that should probably be left closed.
bitserve
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1173


Self made HODLER ✓


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:53:34 AM

Quote
redacted for brevity

hmmmmm

Meh.  Its about time we had some QC FUD.  I have been missing it.  

I don't think the author is fudding.  I don't know how many qbits it would take to make an attack on early addresses feasible, but those qbits are certainly coming eventually.

I think the idea of Satoshi's coins as a quantum DEW line is interesting indeed.

Theymos was defending the idea to remove satoshi coins for the very same reason. Maybe we should ask him what his current stance on that subject is. I would think it is not a big concern for the next few years, but it will be sometime in the future.

Breaking the golden rule of immutability will not come without cost.
It is a dangerous discussion that opens many doors that should probably be left closed.

Yes, it is a very complex subject. Some day I would like to hear more from Theymos justifying the action. When I first heard about it seemed completely nuts and unfair to me. Maybe it isn't. Donno at this time.
jojo69
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 2480


no FOMO


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:58:58 AM

If you guys like Toxoplazmosis you are going to love Ophiocordyceps unilateralis.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1657


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 03:59:05 AM


Yes, it is a very complex subject. Some day I would like to hear more from Theymos justifying the action. When I first heard about it seemed completely nuts and unfair to me. Maybe it isn't. Donno at this time.



It seems sensible on the surface until you peel back the layers and think about the real life repercussions that can happen.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1657


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 28, 2018, 04:00:46 AM

If you guys like Toxoplazmosis you are going to love Ophiocordyceps unilateralis.

Haha, yeah the zombie ants! I love watching PBS and BBC random nature shows and seeing this shit.
This world is fucking weirder than fantasy.
Pages: « 1 ... 22083 22084 22085 22086 22087 22088 22089 22090 22091 22092 22093 22094 22095 22096 22097 22098 22099 22100 22101 22102 22103 22104 22105 22106 22107 22108 22109 22110 22111 22112 22113 22114 22115 22116 22117 22118 22119 22120 22121 22122 22123 22124 22125 22126 22127 22128 22129 22130 22131 22132 [22133] 22134 22135 22136 22137 22138 22139 22140 22141 22142 22143 22144 22145 22146 22147 22148 22149 22150 22151 22152 22153 22154 22155 22156 22157 22158 22159 22160 22161 22162 22163 22164 22165 22166 22167 22168 22169 22170 22171 22172 22173 22174 22175 22176 22177 22178 22179 22180 22181 22182 22183 ... 27090 »
  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!