Bitcoin Forum
June 22, 2017, 08:53:35 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.14.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 [459] 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 ... 1559 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1920354 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 02:49:46 PM
 #9161

I found it interesting to read the comments of the ghash owner who said that pulling a  double spend is actually quite difficult from an  internal technical stand point.

I  wonder what he was talking about?  
1498164815
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498164815

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498164815
Reply with quote  #2

1498164815
Report to moderator
1498164815
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498164815

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498164815
Reply with quote  #2

1498164815
Report to moderator
1498164815
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498164815

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498164815
Reply with quote  #2

1498164815
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 04:33:29 PM
 #9162

Pool miners solve blocks; how do pool owners hold back blocks secretly without the miner who solved the block noticing?
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 05:08:29 PM
 #9163

Something that critics (or hysterical enthusiasts) miss about 51% attacks is the possibility of defensive mining.

Basically, as long as you have a large stake in Bitcoin (or the Bitcoin economy), then you would be willing to mine at a loss to thwart any entity from approaching 51%. Think companies like BitPay or Coinbase, or people who hold 10,000+ bitcoins. Those entities could invest significant resources in mining and make it that much harder for a malicious super-miner. It's always economically irrational for a super-miner to be malicious, but this would make it even more painful.

Quoted because this is important yet often ignored.

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 05:38:15 PM
 #9164

Something that critics (or hysterical enthusiasts) miss about 51% attacks is the possibility of defensive mining.

Basically, as long as you have a large stake in Bitcoin (or the Bitcoin economy), then you would be willing to mine at a loss to thwart any entity from approaching 51%. Think companies like BitPay or Coinbase, or people who hold 10,000+ bitcoins. Those entities could invest significant resources in mining and make it that much harder for a malicious super-miner. It's always economically irrational for a super-miner to be malicious, but this would make it even more painful.

Quoted because this is important yet often ignored.

i don't think an economic 51% attack scenario is a problem.  the incentive structure is too well set up for it to happen.

it's the non-economically driven one thats interesting to consider altho even that one is difficult to imagine given the repercussions of attempting it.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
July 04, 2014, 07:42:21 PM
 #9165

it's the non-economically driven one thats interesting to consider altho even that one is difficult to imagine given the repercussions of attempting it.
It's impossible to secure against all possible non-economically driven attacks.

At the extreme end of the spectrum, the US military could defeat Bitcoin by using nuclear weapons to end all human life on the planet.
At the other end of the spectrum, there is an adversary who is willing to lose a maximum of 1 Satoshi in order to attack the network.

Somewhere between those two extremes there's a boundary between the attacks which we can successfully defend against, and the attacks we shouldn't even bother defending against.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 08:06:34 PM
 #9166

accelerating to the downside on volume:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 08:08:26 PM
 #9167

likewise with Litecoin:

Colonel Panic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27


View Profile
July 04, 2014, 08:26:04 PM
 #9168

Alt players moving out of risky sideshows, now that its time to strap back onto the confirmed bull.
Dragonkiller
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 08:56:36 PM
 #9169

Litecoin getting destroyed.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 09:04:41 PM
 #9170

back in March i penned an update to my subs stating that this last downturn would serve to flush out most, if not all, the altscams.  it's necessary as this is a zero sum game and Bitcoin is being held back by the wasted flows of fiat to these unviable alternatives.  the fact that the oldest and biggest alt platform, Ripple, is going down is an even stronger argument that this trend is going to continue.

we'll see how far this will go.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 09:18:24 PM
 #9171



actually, i really mean this.

i don't think the gold/silver bimetallism historical example, as it relates to Litecoin, really applies today.  back then, the means for physical metals to transmit themselves seamlessly over wide geographical regions was severely hampered and the supplies of these metals were short.  hence, silver needed to supplement gold in certain regions as it's similar properties were close enough to that of gold's to make them viable alternatives.

contrast with what we have with Bitcoin.  an infinitely divisible supply (if necessary) for all our needs, instant and seamless transmission worldwide that can touch anyone with a cellphone, and a programmable nature that if and when a new market driven feature is advanced that is in significant demand, it can and will be grafted onto the main Bitcoin protocol.

we only need one.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 09:23:10 PM
 #9172

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 04, 2014, 09:53:34 PM
 #9173

Code:
// START_DEFINITION
/**
 * Fingerprint Tor authoritative directories enacting the directory protocol.
 */
fingerprint('anonymizer/tor/node/authority') = $tor_authority
  and ($tor_directory or preappid(/anonymizer\/tor\/directory/));
// END_DEFINITION

// START_DEFINITION
/*
Global Variable for Tor foreign directory servers. Searching for potential Tor
clients connecting to the Tor foreign directory servers on ports 80 and 443.
*/

$tor_foreign_directory_ip = ip('193.23.244.244' or '194.109.206.212' or
'86.59.21.38' or '213.115.239.118' or '212.112.245.170') and port ('80' or
'443');
// END_DEFINITION

// START_DEFINITION
/*
this variable contains the 3 Tor directory servers hosted in FVEY countries.
Please do not update this variable with non-FVEY IPs. These are held in a
separate variable called $tor_foreign_directory_ip. Goal is to find potential
Tor clients connecting to the Tor directory servers.
*/
$tor_fvey_directory_ip = ip('128.31.0.39' or '216.224.124.114' or
'208.83.223.34') and port ('80' or '443');
// END_DEFINITION


// START_DEFINITION
requires grammar version 5
/**
 * Identify clients accessing Tor bridge information.
 */
fingerprint('anonymizer/tor/bridge/tls') =
ssl_x509_subject('bridges.torproject.org') or
ssl_dns_name('bridges.torproject.org');

/**
 * Database Tor bridge information extracted from confirmation emails.
 */
fingerprint('anonymizer/tor/bridge/email') =
email_address('bridges@torproject.org')
  and email_body('https://bridges.torproject.org/' : c++
  extractors: {{
    bridges[] = /bridge\s([0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}):?([0-9]{2,4}?[^0-9])/;
  }}
  init: {{
    xks::undefine_name("anonymizer/tor/torbridges/emailconfirmation");
  }}
  main: {{
    static const std::string SCHEMA_OLD = "tor_bridges";
    static const std::string SCHEMA_NEW = "tor_routers";
    static const std::string FLAGS = "Bridge";
    if (bridges) {
      for (size_t i=0; i < bridges.size(); ++i) {
        std::string address = bridges[i][0] + ":" + bridges[i][1];
        DB[SCHEMA_OLD]["tor_bridge"] = address;
        DB.apply();
        DB[SCHEMA_NEW]["tor_ip"] = bridges[i][0];
        DB[SCHEMA_NEW]["tor_port_or"] = bridges[i][1];
        DB[SCHEMA_NEW]["tor_flags"] = FLAGS;
        DB.apply();
      }
      xks::fire_fingerprint("anonymizer/tor/directory/bridge");
    }
    return true;
  }});
// END_DEFINITION


// START_DEFINITION
/*
The fingerprint identifies sessions visiting the Tor Project website from
non-fvey countries.
*/
fingerprint('anonymizer/tor/torpoject_visit')=http_host('www.torproject.org')
and not(xff_cc('US' OR 'GB' OR 'CA' OR 'AU' OR 'NZ'));
// END_DEFINITION


// START_DEFINITION
/*
These variables define terms and websites relating to the TAILs (The Amnesic
Incognito Live System) software program, a comsec mechanism advocated by
extremists on extremist forums.
*/

$TAILS_terms=word('tails' or 'Amnesiac Incognito Live System') and word('linux'
or ' USB ' or ' CD ' or 'secure desktop' or ' IRC ' or 'truecrypt' or ' tor ');
$TAILS_websites=('tails.boum.org/') or ('linuxjournal.com/content/linux*');
// END_DEFINITION

// START_DEFINITION
/*
This fingerprint identifies users searching for the TAILs (The Amnesic
Incognito Live System) software program, viewing documents relating to TAILs,
or viewing websites that detail TAILs.
*/
fingerprint('ct_mo/TAILS')=
fingerprint('documents/comsec/tails_doc') or web_search($TAILS_terms) or
url($TAILS_websites) or html_title($TAILS_websites);
// END_DEFINITION


// START_DEFINITION
requires grammar version 5
/**
 * Aggregate Tor hidden service addresses seen in raw traffic.
 */
mapreduce::plugin('anonymizer/tor/plugin/onion') =
  immediate_keyword(/(?:([a-z]+):\/\/){0,1}([a-z2-7]{16})\.onion(?::(\d+)){0,1}/c : c++
    includes: {{
      #include <boost/lexical_cast.hpp>
    }}
    proto: {{
      message onion_t {
        required string address = 1;
        optional string scheme = 2;
        optional string port = 3;
      }
    }}
    mapper<onion_t>: {{
      static const std::string prefix = "anonymizer/tor/hiddenservice/address/";

      onion_t onion;
      size_t matches = cur_args()->matches.size();
      for (size_t pos=0; pos < matches; ++pos) {
        const std::string &value = match(pos);
        if (value.size() == 16)
          onion.set_address(value);
        else if(!onion.has_scheme())
          onion.set_scheme(value);
        else
          onion.set_port(value);
      }

      if (!onion.has_address())
        return false;

      MAPPER.map(onion.address(), onion);
      xks::fire_fingerprint(prefix + onion.address());
      return true;
    }}
    reducer<onion_t>: {{
      for (values_t::const_iterator iter = VALUES.begin();
          iter != VALUES.end();
          ++iter) {
        DB["tor_onion_survey"]["onion_address"] = iter->address() + ".onion";
        if (iter->has_scheme())
          DB["tor_onion_survey"]["onion_scheme"] = iter->scheme();
        if (iter->has_port())
          DB["tor_onion_survey"]["onion_port"] = iter->port();
        DB["tor_onion_survey"]["onion_count"] = boost::lexical_cast<std::string>(TOTAL_VALUE_COUNT);
        DB.apply();
        DB.clear();
      }
      return true;
    }});

/**
 * Placeholder fingerprint for Tor hidden service addresses.
 * Real fingerpritns will be fired by the plugins
 *   'anonymizer/tor/plugin/onion/*'
 */
fingerprint('anonymizer/tor/hiddenservice/address') = nil;
// END_DEFINITION


// START_DEFINITION
appid('anonymizer/mailer/mixminion', 3.0, viewer=$ascii_viewer) =
        http_host('mixminion') or
        ip('128.31.0.34');
// END_DEFINITION

kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952


View Profile
July 05, 2014, 01:37:35 AM
 #9174



actually, i really mean this.

i don't think the gold/silver bimetallism historical example, as it relates to Litecoin, really applies today.  back then, the means for physical metals to transmit themselves seamlessly over wide geographical regions was severely hampered and the supplies of these metals were short.  hence, silver needed to supplement gold in certain regions as it's similar properties were close enough to that of gold's to make them viable alternatives.

contrast with what we have with Bitcoin.  an infinitely divisible supply (if necessary) for all our needs, instant and seamless transmission worldwide that can touch anyone with a cellphone, and a programmable nature that if and when a new market driven feature is advanced that is in significant demand, it can and will be grafted onto the main Bitcoin protocol.

we only need one.

theres a lot of in demand features but nothing has ever been grafted onto the bitcoin protocol?

"Pioneering a revolutionary novel consensus mechanism called proof of importance."
kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952


View Profile
July 05, 2014, 01:40:14 AM
 #9175

back in March i penned an update to my subs stating that this last downturn would serve to flush out most, if not all, the altscams.  it's necessary as this is a zero sum game and Bitcoin is being held back by the wasted flows of fiat to these unviable alternatives.  the fact that the oldest and biggest alt platform, Ripple, is going down is an even stronger argument that this trend is going to continue.

we'll see how far this will go.

what about the likes of nxt or soon to be nem? they are far superior platforms nem being more so. what makes then "unviable" in your opinion?

"Pioneering a revolutionary novel consensus mechanism called proof of importance."
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 05, 2014, 01:54:56 AM
 #9176

back in March i penned an update to my subs stating that this last downturn would serve to flush out most, if not all, the altscams.  it's necessary as this is a zero sum game and Bitcoin is being held back by the wasted flows of fiat to these unviable alternatives.  the fact that the oldest and biggest alt platform, Ripple, is going down is an even stronger argument that this trend is going to continue.

we'll see how far this will go.

what about the likes of nxt or soon to be nem? they are far superior platforms nem being more so. what makes then "unviable" in your opinion?

the POS initial distribution is deemed unfair by the market and the fact that mining favors those same creators will discourage new players from entering.
kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952


View Profile
July 05, 2014, 02:02:16 AM
 #9177

back in March i penned an update to my subs stating that this last downturn would serve to flush out most, if not all, the altscams.  it's necessary as this is a zero sum game and Bitcoin is being held back by the wasted flows of fiat to these unviable alternatives.  the fact that the oldest and biggest alt platform, Ripple, is going down is an even stronger argument that this trend is going to continue.

we'll see how far this will go.

what about the likes of nxt or soon to be nem? they are far superior platforms nem being more so. what makes then "unviable" in your opinion?

the POS initial distribution is deemed unfair by the market and the fact that mining favors those same creators will discourage new players from entering.

nem has 3000 original stake holders and a new proof importance algo which means that the nodes that are more important to the network "mine/forge" more than those with simply more coins. which fixes the hoarding issues inherent in nxt. 3000 stake holders will get equal amounts, there was not an ipo, its was a "pay a fee, join the movement" sort of thing. so even the ipo does no favor those with better finances. also the stake holder list went through weeks of taint analysis and auditing to remove sock puppets.

edit: i think the market deems nem fair seeing as it was trading at 2k dollars per stake, pre alpha. i say "was" because the dollar value has fallen as btc and nxt fell. nem has stayed perfectly stable in term of nxt<>nemstake (stakes are traded on nxt AE @ 25-30k nxt per stake)

"Pioneering a revolutionary novel consensus mechanism called proof of importance."
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
July 05, 2014, 02:22:32 AM
 #9178

what about the likes of nxt or soon to be nem? they are far superior platforms nem being more so. what makes then "unviable" in your opinion?

There is no known solution to the "nothing-at-stake" problem (also known as the "history-rewrite" problem) that all proof-of-stake (PoS) distributed consensus mechanisms suffer from.  This has been debated ad nauseum since the original thread on July 11, 2011: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=27787.0.  Current PoS coins get around this problem, for example, by having the developers sign blocks as valid (Peercoin) or by introducing regular blockchain checkpoints into the code (Nxt).  In other words, these PoS coins are not decentralized.

Even ignoring the nothing-at-stake problem, "dubious" is probably a better adjective than "superior" to describe these platforms.


Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952


View Profile
July 05, 2014, 02:26:20 AM
 #9179

what about the likes of nxt or soon to be nem? they are far superior platforms nem being more so. what makes then "unviable" in your opinion?

There is no known solution to the "nothing-at-stake" problem (also known as the "history-rewrite" problem) that all proof-of-stake (PoS) distributed consensus mechanisms suffer from.  This has been debated ad nauseum since the original thread on July 11, 2011: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=27787.0.  Current PoS coins get around this problem, for example, by having the developers sign blocks as valid (Peercoin) or by introducing regular blockchain checkpoints into the code (Nxt).  In other words, these PoS coins are not decentralized.

Even ignoring the nothing-at-stake problem, "dubious" is probably a better adjective than "superior" to describe these platforms.



theres a bounty equal to the market cap of nxt. if it was doable. do you not think it would have been done?

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/bounty-for-successful-nothing-at-stake-attack/?topicseen

also.

https://nxtforum.org/general/how-does-nxt-fix-the-nothing-at-stake-problem/

"Pioneering a revolutionary novel consensus mechanism called proof of importance."
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
July 05, 2014, 02:42:21 AM
 #9180

theres a bounty equal to the market cap of nxt. if it was doable. do you not think it would have been done?


...Current PoS coins get around this problem, for example, by having the developers sign blocks as valid (Peercoin) or by introducing regular blockchain checkpoints into the code (Nxt).  In other words, these PoS coins are not decentralized…

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
Pages: « 1 ... 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 [459] 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 ... 1559 »
  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!