Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[Elwar]

Probably should ask in Dev but you folks are hip to the latest things...

Is there a way to automatically forward from an address you control to another address? Like some perpetual address locking mechanism?


I'm looking at Rootstock.

The way it works (as far as I can tell right now) is that you send from your wallet to a designated Rootstock controlled Bitcoin address.

At that point the bitcoins are locked and the same amount of Smartcoins are released on the Rootstock network back to the address of the wallet you sent from (again, I have no idea if this is reality). So now you have control of your Rootstock smartcoins because you know the private key of the originating address.

You can do all of your smartcoin stuff, then when you want them back in bitcoins you send to a designated Rootstock exit address and coins are released to an address you sent from on Rootstock (maybe that's how it works?).

I was wondering if there would be a way to send from one address to another on the Bitcoin network but have it go through Rootstock, do some filtering or whatever and come back without needing to run wallet software to move it along.

[Last of the V8s]

did not know that tbh

[Rosewater Foundation]

did not know that tbh

TIL thanks for the tip off

[Elwar]

SHA-2 (Secure Hash Algorithm 2) is a set of cryptographic hash functions.

SHA-256 is used in several different parts of the Bitcoin network:

Mining uses SHA-256 as the Proof of work algorithm.
SHA-256 is used in the creation of bitcoin addresses to improve security and privacy.

[Rosewater Foundation]

Another pearl from the Dev section:

nLockTime is specific to the subject transaction. This means if you sign a transaction with an nLockTime, that transaction cannot confirm in a block prior to that constraint.

OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY on the other hand, restrict outputs of a transaction from being spent prior to a certain constraint. There are very different use cases for OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY than for nLockTime. If a customer is withdrawing funds from a service, there is no real reason why the service would want to restrict the customer from spending their withdrawal anything other than immediately.

As mentioned above, OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY will be used with LN and other similar payment channels. It is likely that OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY was soft-forked into Bitcoin with LN/payments channels in mind.

[d_eddie]

SHA-2 (Secure Hash Algorithm 2) is a set of cryptographic hash functions.

SHA-256 is used in several different parts of the Bitcoin network:

Mining uses SHA-256 as the Proof of work algorithm.
SHA-256 is used in the creation of bitcoin addresses to improve security and privacy.

How dare you contradict?
Satoshi knows better for sure.
 

[xhomerx10]

SHA-2 (Secure Hash Algorithm 2) is a set of cryptographic hash functions.

SHA-256 is used in several different parts of the Bitcoin network:

Mining uses SHA-256 as the Proof of work algorithm.
SHA-256 is used in the creation of bitcoin addresses to improve security and privacy.

 Yeah and without ECDSA they're pretty tough to spend.  Seems like crypto currencies need cryptography to function.  Anyone know what Satoshi^-1 was driving at?


edit: major correction of the meaning of Satoshi

[Last of the V8s]

Another pearl from the Dev section:

nLockTime is specific to the subject transaction. This means if you sign a transaction with an nLockTime, that transaction cannot confirm in a block prior to that constraint.

OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY on the other hand, restrict outputs of a transaction from being spent prior to a certain constraint. There are very different use cases for OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY than for nLockTime. If a customer is withdrawing funds from a service, there is no real reason why the service would want to restrict the customer from spending their withdrawal anything other than immediately.

As mentioned above, OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY will be used with LN and other similar payment channels. It is likely that OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY was soft-forked into Bitcoin with LN/payments channels in mind.

Panthers52=Quickseller=MasterP should know a thing or two about escrow and how to screw with it.

[Rosewater Foundation]

I see you have a list, too.

[bitserve]

SHA-2 (Secure Hash Algorithm 2) is a set of cryptographic hash functions.

SHA-256 is used in several different parts of the Bitcoin network:

Mining uses SHA-256 as the Proof of work algorithm.
SHA-256 is used in the creation of bitcoin addresses to improve security and privacy.

 Yeah and without ECDSA they're pretty tough to spend.  Seems like crypto currencies need cryptography to function.  Anyone know what Satoshi was driving at?

He is probably (intentionally) confusing cryptography with encryption or cipher which is main commonly accepted meaning/function of cryptography. In so, he is also implying there no "secret" message/information hidden and being transmitted in crypto currencies. I beg to differ even in that case as, for example, a signed hash could be considered some way of transmit a "secret" information being the information/message "contained" the confirmation/proof of control of the private key... without exposing it (that is, remaining secret).

Anyways it is just a silly play with wording that only serves to confirm the attention whore and drama addict he is.

[realr0ach]

Hasn't mentioned precious metals or joos in the latest 4 posts.

Do we need some mentions?

[marcus_of_augustus]

did not know that tbh

... it's a bit more nuanced than that. As others note cryptographic primitives like SHA-256, RIPMED-160 hash functions and also digital signing using secp256k1 ECDSA derived cryptographic keys are the essential building blocks of bitcoin.

What he's ham-fistedly trying to say is that there is no 'encryption' used in bitcoin, to the effect of being too cute for his own good. However, Bitcoin Core wallet bitcoin-qt does use a wallet encryption layer, PKI for BIP 70, SSL for for RPC calls and Tor is enabled by default for peer-to-peer connections when it is available. Find me one wallet that isn't using 'encryption' of some sort. It's an empty, bullshitting statement to say cryptocurrencies do not use cryptography. Guy is a tool.

[xhomerx10]

 recycled from an earlier soullyG post

[Last of the V8s]

I see you have a list, too.

I do like a good list.
Here is last night's top 10 banned words on Weibo:

[Rosewater Foundation]

If they can't say 'orgy' how do they talk about all the group sex they have?

[Last of the V8s]

If they can't say 'orgy' how do they talk about all the group sex they have?

I'd still say 'enthusiastically', but yes, 'surreptitiously'.

[Last of the V8s]

did not know that tbh

... it's a bit more nuanced than that. As others note cryptographic primitives like SHA-256, RIPMED-160 hash functions and also digital signing using secp256k1 ECDSA derived cryptographic keys are the essential building blocks of bitcoin.

What he's ham-fistedly trying to say is that there is no 'encryption' used in bitcoin, to the effect of being too cute for his own good. However, Bitcoin Core wallet bitcoin-qt does use a wallet encryption layer, PKI for BIP 70, SSL for for RPC calls and Tor is enabled by default for peer-to-peer connections when it is available. Find me one wallet that isn't using 'encryption' of some sort. It's an empty, bullshitting statement to say cryptocurrencies do not use cryptography. Guy is a tool.

You were probably around for when it dawned on everyone that the wallet wasn't even encrypted...

[Rosewater Foundation]

I was in a taxi last night and caught the end of this song. It went like this: 'I'm in love with the shape of your body'. If you can imagine that

[jojo69]

What has been going on in ETH land...are they ever going to get their shit together over there?

[bones261]

OMG, it appears we are about to make the death cross.  Should I really be concerned?