Quote from: kingcolex on April 29, 2015, 07:05:18 PM

If there was a way to develop Bitcoin with QT built in 2FA option sending a text code to withdrawal funds but only if phone numbers could be stored decentrally.

This would make a great addition.

Quote from: Amph on April 29, 2015, 06:58:56 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 29, 2015, 06:48:49 PM

Quote from: Amph on April 29, 2015, 07:25:30 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 29, 2015, 12:33:12 AM

Quote from: GenTarkin on April 28, 2015, 11:32:42 PM

Eliminate the possibility of a 51% attack...

how?

this is something that may work well for now, is an idea about a code to be added just in case

Something like "ignore a longer chain orphaning the current best chain if the sum(priorities of transactions included in new chain) is much less than sum(priorities of transactions in the part of the current best chain that would be orphaned)" would mean a 51% attacker would have to have both lots of hashing power AND lots of old, high-priority bitcoins to keep up a transaction-denial-of-service attack. And they'd pretty quickly run out of old, high-priority bitcoins and would be forced to either include other people's transactions or have their chain rejected.

http://gavintech.blogspot.it/2012/05/neutralizing-51-attack.html

Couldn't they just get around that by doing their own high priority transactions?

it will be a war in the end, to who will connect to more nodes, like satoshi said about transaction confirmation

This is the truth. =/

Quote from: JeromeL on April 29, 2015, 07:59:57 AM

So you are looking for ideas to create ANOTHER shitcoin ... ?

No there are plenty of those. I am attempting to create a proposal for the BTC foundation. It wouldnt be for a few years, but time will tell that btc is not perfect and things need to change. Just trying to think about it early.

Quote from: Amph on April 29, 2015, 07:25:30 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 29, 2015, 12:33:12 AM

Quote from: GenTarkin on April 28, 2015, 11:32:42 PM

Eliminate the possibility of a 51% attack...

how?

this is something that may work well for now, is an idea about a code to be added just in case

Something like "ignore a longer chain orphaning the current best chain if the sum(priorities of transactions included in new chain) is much less than sum(priorities of transactions in the part of the current best chain that would be orphaned)" would mean a 51% attacker would have to have both lots of hashing power AND lots of old, high-priority bitcoins to keep up a transaction-denial-of-service attack. And they'd pretty quickly run out of old, high-priority bitcoins and would be forced to either include other people's transactions or have their chain rejected.

http://gavintech.blogspot.it/2012/05/neutralizing-51-attack.html

Very interesting. =p thank you

Quote from: Omikifuse on April 29, 2015, 02:12:26 AM

Slower halvings, so the extreme early adopters would not have such huge advantage, like happened with BTC

Would you mind explaining how this would help?

Quote from: minerpumpkin on April 29, 2015, 01:09:46 AM

I think it's pretty difficult to make Bitcoin really "more secure" in any way. The core principles remain intact, still. There hasn't been a single occurrence of the Bitcoin core principles failing or allowing a fraudulent transaction. Making Wallets and computer systems safer is a whole other story, and I don't think that changes to Bitcoin can do anything to tackle those problems, unfortunately...

The only thing I have seen and it has occured over 17 times. is gigahash.io getting over the 51% mark and holding for an amount of time.

Quote from: R2D221 on April 29, 2015, 01:07:51 AM

Quote from: FifthGhostbuster on April 29, 2015, 12:40:32 AM

So far the only implimentation of asic proof I have seen is with CureCoin using protein folding as mining. Do you have any other ideas on how to do this?

Why is protein folding ASIC-resistant?

Protein folding require heavy rendering from cpu and gpu's. So some really big super computer's atm are the closest thing to an asic for it.