Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 08:44:26 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: WHY CHANGE(aka BIP hell)?  (Read 9641 times)
DiThi
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 157

Firstbits: 1dithi


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 08:28:14 PM
 #21

Let's put it clear for everyone then:

PIP 11: It's already in the protocol but we need support from everyone (GUIs, webpages) to arbitrary-sized addresses such as this one: 1TM1TTodZRiGNY23hgEW4QLroBW5By2gF1FQBwst7BEGPvS3gVh6PuqF5yNPtLFFFy71NzC2bZEX7mU jMJAb8wh6tPVpQeMCcu68F

PIP 16/17: They're too similar the more I read them. It requires protocol changes but they will allow to have regular-sized addresses which redeems the money with several signatures instead of a single one. It also allows much more complex transactions while the address stays the same size. It allows space savings in the block chain.

We can have escrow right now with PIP 11 (it just needs GUI support), but not secure multisig-by-default wallets, as DeathAndTaxes says.

1DiThiTXZpNmmoGF2dTfSku3EWGsWHCjwt
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 08:36:35 PM
 #22

Let's put it clear for everyone then:

PIP 11: It's already in the protocol but we need support from everyone (GUIs, webpages) to arbitrary-sized addresses sich as this one: 1TM1TTodZRiGNY23hgEW4QLroBW5By2gF1FQBwst7BEGPvS3gVh6PuqF5yNPtLFFFy71NzC2bZEX7mU jMJAb8wh6tPVpQeMCcu68F

PIP 16/17: They're too similar the more I read them. It requires protocol changes but they will allow to have regular-sized addresses which redeems the money with several signatures instead of a single one. It also allows much more complex transactions while the address stays the same size. It allows space savings in the block chain.

We can have escrow right now with PIP 11 (it just needs GUI support), but not secure multisig-by-default wallets, as DeathAndTaxes says.
why would i have multisig wallets? more keys to keep secret, is just stupid!
the only real world use of multisigs is escrows, for which there is no need for small good looking addresses.

this is just plain stupidity!

"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
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
expert
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
January 20, 2012, 08:40:41 PM
 #23

The concept is that you have to approve transactions on both your PC and phone, so a virus on one of them doesn't steal your money.

DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 08:43:22 PM
 #24

why would i have multisig wallets? more keys to keep secret, is just stupid!

Then don't use it.  Nobody is asking you to.

Your rant is like saying:
Why does google/mtgox/openID use multi-factor authentication?  More keys to keep secret is just stupid.
Why is it possible to create SSL cert which requires two (or more( signatures? More keys to keep secret is just stupid.
Why does launching a US ICBM with nuclear payload require two keys? More keys to keep secret is just stupid.
Why does it require my key and bank's key to open my safety deposit box? More keys to keep secret is just stupid.
DiThi
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 157

Firstbits: 1dithi


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 08:44:38 PM
 #25

why would i have multisig wallets? more keys to keep secret, is just stupid!
the only real world use of multisigs is escrows, for which there is no need for small good looking addresses.

this is just plain stupidity!

Companies with bank accounts where 2 responsibles are required for high volume transactions are stupid. Yeah...
Your wallet already stores several keys and generates new ones from time to time, even if you don't see them in your input addresses.

The concept is that you have to approve transactions on both your PC and phone, so a virus on one of them doesn't steal your money.

Exactly. Bitcoin will be valuable to everyone only when this is possible. Not everybody can make sure all the time their computers aren't compromised.

1DiThiTXZpNmmoGF2dTfSku3EWGsWHCjwt
grue
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932



View Profile
January 20, 2012, 08:45:21 PM
 #26

why would i have multisig wallets? more keys to keep secret, is just stupid!
the only real world use of multisigs is escrows, for which there is no need for small good looking addresses.

this is just plain stupidity!
how about you show some respect to the people on this forum, instead of acting arrogant and asking everyone to spoon-feed everything to you.

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures
Red Emerald
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile WWW
January 20, 2012, 08:47:58 PM
 #27

Let's put it clear for everyone then:

PIP 11: It's already in the protocol but we need support from everyone (GUIs, webpages) to arbitrary-sized addresses sich as this one: 1TM1TTodZRiGNY23hgEW4QLroBW5By2gF1FQBwst7BEGPvS3gVh6PuqF5yNPtLFFFy71NzC2bZEX7mU jMJAb8wh6tPVpQeMCcu68F

PIP 16/17: They're too similar the more I read them. It requires protocol changes but they will allow to have regular-sized addresses which redeems the money with several signatures instead of a single one. It also allows much more complex transactions while the address stays the same size. It allows space savings in the block chain.

We can have escrow right now with PIP 11 (it just needs GUI support), but not secure multisig-by-default wallets, as DeathAndTaxes says.
why would i have multisig wallets? more keys to keep secret, is just stupid!
the only real world use of multisigs is escrows, for which there is no need for small good looking addresses.

this is just plain stupidity!
Real banks do this.  When you try to send funds, your phone gets a text and then you have to validate it from the phone. This isn't stupid at all.  It means that an attacker has to control both your computer and phone which is way harder for them to do.

kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 08:53:53 PM
 #28

why would i have multisig wallets? more keys to keep secret, is just stupid!
the only real world use of multisigs is escrows, for which there is no need for small good looking addresses.

this is just plain stupidity!
how about you show some respect to the people on this forum, instead of acting arrogant and asking everyone to spoon-feed everything to you.
im trying to get you to spoon feed me, because this stuff is just sooo stupid, that you have to realise what you are doing.

"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
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 08:55:49 PM
 #29

Let's put it clear for everyone then:

PIP 11: It's already in the protocol but we need support from everyone (GUIs, webpages) to arbitrary-sized addresses sich as this one: 1TM1TTodZRiGNY23hgEW4QLroBW5By2gF1FQBwst7BEGPvS3gVh6PuqF5yNPtLFFFy71NzC2bZEX7mU jMJAb8wh6tPVpQeMCcu68F

PIP 16/17: They're too similar the more I read them. It requires protocol changes but they will allow to have regular-sized addresses which redeems the money with several signatures instead of a single one. It also allows much more complex transactions while the address stays the same size. It allows space savings in the block chain.

We can have escrow right now with PIP 11 (it just needs GUI support), but not secure multisig-by-default wallets, as DeathAndTaxes says.
why would i have multisig wallets? more keys to keep secret, is just stupid!
the only real world use of multisigs is escrows, for which there is no need for small good looking addresses.

this is just plain stupidity!
Real banks do this.  When you try to send funds, your phone gets a text and then you have to validate it from the phone. This isn't stupid at all.  It means that an attacker has to control both your computer and phone which is way harder for them to do.
mine bank does not. i have keep my computer free from virus. like any other person should do.

"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
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
expert
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:04:07 PM
 #30

mine bank does not. i have keep my computer free from virus. like any other person should do.
So if someone ever gets a virus even once, they should be financially ruined for life?

grue
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932



View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:05:47 PM
 #31

mine bank does not. i have keep my computer free from virus. like any other person should do.
oh boy, more of "I NEVER SAW THIS THEREFORE IT NEVER HAPPENS". Roll Eyes there's a lot of things people should do. but do everyone do it? no. not everyone is a pro when it comes to computers, and people are especially vulnerable to social engineering attacks. what's so bad about adding an extra layer of security? This isn't your project. if you don't like this change, you're free to start your own fork. the source code in on github.
im trying to get you to spoon feed me, because this stuff is just sooo stupid, that you have to realise what you are doing.
not sure if serious. then i read the text below your avatar. now you're on my ignore list

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:06:59 PM
 #32

mine bank does not. i have keep my computer free from virus. like any other person should do.
So if someone ever gets a virus even once, they should be financially ruined for life?
yes. or they should have divide their bitcoins, or put them on paper wallets.

"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
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:09:19 PM
 #33

mine bank does not. i have keep my computer free from virus. like any other person should do.
oh boy, more of "I NEVER SAW THIS THEREFORE IT NEVER HAPPENS". Roll Eyes there's a lot of things people should do. but do everyone do it? no. not everyone is a pro when it comes to computers, and people are especially vulnerable to social engineering attacks. what's so bad about adding an extra layer of security? This isn't your project. if you don't like this change, you're free to start your own fork. the source code in on github.
im trying to get you to spoon feed me, because this stuff is just sooo stupid, that you have to realise what you are doing.
not sure if serious. then i read the text below your avatar. now you're on my ignore list
evolution will eliminate week species. computer retards -> week species.

"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
DiThi
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 157

Firstbits: 1dithi


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:12:44 PM
 #34

I have a question for you: Do you want Bitcoin to be successful?

If the answer is yes, we need more people to use it securely. Learn from the problems of the last year, where each security breach meant a drop in the price and the users. You blame people, but people blame Bitcoin itself, making imposible to Bitcoin to ever be popular.

1DiThiTXZpNmmoGF2dTfSku3EWGsWHCjwt
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:15:06 PM
 #35

What do you think it's going to break exactly? What is your concern?
protocol upgrade, any old client would do funky stuff, which is not good.

"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
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:16:04 PM
 #36

why would i have multisig wallets? more keys to keep secret, is just stupid!
Then don't use it.  Nobody is asking you to.
true. but you are trying to force a protocol upgrade down over my head.

"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
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:20:02 PM
 #37

What do you think it's going to break exactly? What is your concern?
protocol upgrade, any old client would do funky stuff, which is not good.

You are afraid of change? What if a bug is found tomorrow in the old client and we need a change. Maybe our ability to change it what will save the block chain in the future. Practice makes perfect.

I'm nervous about change too, but we shouldn't be afraid of it. Test it well, and be prepared for the worst case scenario.
im not afraid of change. if it was to fix a bug, it would be understandable.
but to introduce more flaws and bugs, to fix a problem that does not exists, is not acceptable

"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
kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:21:42 PM
 #38

mine bank does not. i have keep my computer free from virus. like any other person should do.
oh boy, more of "I NEVER SAW THIS THEREFORE IT NEVER HAPPENS". Roll Eyes there's a lot of things people should do. but do everyone do it? no. not everyone is a pro when it comes to computers, and people are especially vulnerable to social engineering attacks. what's so bad about adding an extra layer of security? This isn't your project. if you don't like this change, you're free to start your own fork. the source code in on github.
im trying to get you to spoon feed me, because this stuff is just sooo stupid, that you have to realise what you are doing.
not sure if serious. then i read the text below your avatar. now you're on my ignore list
evolution will eliminate week species. computer retards -> week species.

Dude. Can you change a transmission? Can you build a house? Can you perform open heart surgery? Some people are better at some shit than other shit. You are being ridiculous.
no but i don't have to. if people can't handle it themselves, they should pay for it. but if they can't handle money securely they should starve to dead.
EDIT: or pay for insurance

"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
Red Emerald
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile WWW
January 20, 2012, 09:28:23 PM
 #39

mine bank does not. i have keep my computer free from virus. like any other person should do.
oh boy, more of "I NEVER SAW THIS THEREFORE IT NEVER HAPPENS". Roll Eyes there's a lot of things people should do. but do everyone do it? no. not everyone is a pro when it comes to computers, and people are especially vulnerable to social engineering attacks. what's so bad about adding an extra layer of security? This isn't your project. if you don't like this change, you're free to start your own fork. the source code in on github.
im trying to get you to spoon feed me, because this stuff is just sooo stupid, that you have to realise what you are doing.
not sure if serious. then i read the text below your avatar. now you're on my ignore list
evolution will eliminate week species. computer retards -> week species.

Dude. Can you change a transmission? Can you build a house? Can you perform open heart surgery? Some people are better at some shit than other shit. You are being ridiculous.
no but i don't have to. if people can't handle it themselves, they should pay for it. but if they can't handle money securely they should starve to dead.
EDIT: or pay for insurance
sigh...

2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708



View Profile
January 20, 2012, 09:52:31 PM
 #40

no but i don't have to. if people can't handle it themselves, they should pay for it. but if they can't handle money securely they should starve to dead.
EDIT: or pay for insurance
sigh...
There aren't any more entertaining subspecies of Homo Sapiens than the Scandinavian kooks.

Kokjo is from Denmark and he advocates starvation for those who can't properly operate the computer.

Pentti Linkola is from Finland and he advocates using nuclear weapons to solve the problem of overpopulation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentti_Linkola



http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/06/in-praise-of-pentti-linkola/

I think we should all welcome our Scandinavian overlords, before it is too late!

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »  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!