Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 67 results by Random Seller
Re: How exactly does hardfork work ? How can I study about it?
Its wrong to say that a hard fork occurs when there are 2 versions of the blockchain. That situations also occurs in a soft fork. The actual difference between a hard fork and a soft fork is determined by the ability of the nodes on the main chain to validate blocks that are produced in accordance with the consensus rule of the fork.
Soft forks don't lead to a blockchain split, otherwise the SegWit activation would have lead to an alternative blockchain. SegWit transactions still look valid to legacy nodes, it's just that legacy nodes lack the ability to properly interpret them under the new rules that the soft fork brings with it. Now if you were to disable SegWit again -- ie. have a signifcant number of nodes handle SegWit transactions like legacy nodes -- that then would require a hard fork, since SegWit nodes would deem such transactions as invalid while legacy nodes would process them, leading to a chain split.
In short: Soft forks only require a hard fork (ie. blockchain split) when rolling back the change, not when first deploying the update. Not requiring a blockchain split on deployment / activation is pretty much the definition of a soft fork.
Andreas is able to explain this better than me:
Here the video:
https://youtu.be/rpeceXY1QBM
Re: How exactly does hardfork work ? How can I study about it?
The 'Y' is used for imagination. In reality there is no real split.
Each node stores its own copy of the blockchain. When a hard fork occurs there are basically 2 versions of the blockchain spread between nodes.
Both versions have the same data until block X. The representation with an 'Y' seems to be the most popular one. But from block X those are 2 completely independent networks.
Its wrong to say that a hard fork occurs when there are 2 versions of the blockchain. That situations also occurs in a soft fork. The actual difference between a hard fork and a soft fork is determined by the ability of the nodes on the main chain to validate blocks that are produced in accordance with the consensus rule of the fork.
The Y is is basically what you see if you draw a graph of the split.
Re: How exactly does hardfork work ? How can I study about it?
apologies first as English is not my first language.
I would really appreciate if anyone could explain the concept of hardfork.
As I understand it, if there is a hardfork with say, bitcoin, everyone who own X amount of
bitcoin gets X amount of hardforked coin as well.
For example, if bitcoin platinum were real, a person who owns 15 bitcoins would've got
15 bitcoin platinums.
But, software engineers who hardforked ended up with tons of them.
For example, litecoin developers ended up with tons of litecoin.
How did this happen? Also, how can I study about the blockchain technology?
And if one hardforks a coin, how do you acquire the mainnet (the network)?
I would really appreciate if anyone could explain the concept of hardfork.
As I understand it, if there is a hardfork with say, bitcoin, everyone who own X amount of
bitcoin gets X amount of hardforked coin as well.
For example, if bitcoin platinum were real, a person who owns 15 bitcoins would've got
15 bitcoin platinums.
But, software engineers who hardforked ended up with tons of them.
For example, litecoin developers ended up with tons of litecoin.
How did this happen? Also, how can I study about the blockchain technology?
And if one hardforks a coin, how do you acquire the mainnet (the network)?
To understand what is a hard fork you need to understand what is a blockchain.
The blockchain basically are bloks that are chained together by having the current block reference the previous block.
A fork normally happens when theres a change in the consensus rule. When that happens youll see the chain split into two (imagine a Y). Thats why everyone will have the same amount of coins on the fork and on the main chain.
The difference between a hard fork and a soft fork is that blocks from a soft fork are still accepted by the main chain. Whereas in a hard fork the blocks cannot be accepted by the main chain. Take bitcoin cash for example. They forked the chain by increasing the blocksize to 8mb. The nodes on the main chain wont be able to validate that because they can only accept blocks up to 1mb. As time pass youll be able to see a clear divergence.
Litecoin is not a fork because they didnt branch out of the main chain. They started all over.
Re: Why to write down your seed? regular InfoSec policies say never write passwords
For starters I'm not exactly sure if this is the right board but I feel it's more of a technical discussion regarding the security of a wallet seed and private keys (not to mention I don't want this to fall into the incessant cesspool of worthless megathreads preyed on by bounty hunters and other forum abusers and would rather see more quality discussion).
So back to the main question. Since early times the standard advice regarding passwords was to not write them down or rather to atleast avoid writing it down. A mainstream media article about this would be say this How To Geek article (https://www.howtogeek.com/howto/31259/ask-how-to-geek-whats-wrong-with-writing-down-your-password/) which is rather adamant writing down your password may not be the best thing to do.
However then we move over to crypto. A large number of wallets and sites urge users to write down the passwords. To quote an example:
Source: https://blockonomi.com/keep-recovery-seed-safe/
Heck there's papers wallets which is basically the even more advanced version of that.
Thoughts
So back to the main question. Since early times the standard advice regarding passwords was to not write them down or rather to atleast avoid writing it down. A mainstream media article about this would be say this How To Geek article (https://www.howtogeek.com/howto/31259/ask-how-to-geek-whats-wrong-with-writing-down-your-password/) which is rather adamant writing down your password may not be the best thing to do.
However then we move over to crypto. A large number of wallets and sites urge users to write down the passwords. To quote an example:
Quote
Anytime a wallet is set up, users are provided with a unique recovery seed composed of anywhere from 1224 randomized words. You are urged to write this recovery seed down somewhere safe and to never post it online.
Source: https://blockonomi.com/keep-recovery-seed-safe/
Heck there's papers wallets which is basically the even more advanced version of that.
Thoughts
- If enough care is taken does the medium of storage matter? A paper is just as easy to steal details from as compared to a notepad file provided there's physical access though I do understand the average user is at much greater risk to malware than forced instrusion
- Wouldn't a air-gapped machine with an encrypted drive or atleast the file containing the seed secured by a competent passphrase be significantly more secure than something like a paper which can easily be lost or otherwise compromised
The simple answer would be simplicity.
If you want more security there is an option to generate the seeds with a password (Im not sure thats in core though). That way people would need both to generate your private keys.
Re: How to make a single address for every individual ? (300,000+)
Im guessing that there should be a implementation for xpub for Ethereum.
You could use that xpub to generate the required addresses programmatically, than tie them to each user on your db.
I would also check the db each time after generating a pubk just to be absolutely sure theres no duplicates.
You could use that xpub to generate the required addresses programmatically, than tie them to each user on your db.
I would also check the db each time after generating a pubk just to be absolutely sure theres no duplicates.
Re: Where do you keep your private keys?? I need good ideas!!
You dont have to be a genius nor do you need any special methods to store your private keys. Pen and paper is fine.
Thats what I learnt from watching Andreas. Heres the link of the video if you need it:
https://youtu.be/vt-zXEsJ61U
Thats what I learnt from watching Andreas. Heres the link of the video if you need it:
https://youtu.be/vt-zXEsJ61U
I guess it all depends on the use the network will have. Right now we have low fees again, because there are no spam attacks going, and most users don't really do anything with their coins. The fees problem was greatly caused by exchanges like coinbase and gemini, but they seem to be finally correcting the problem by adoptiing segwit and batching their transactions.
I dont think the current fee decrease is due to exchanges adopting Segwit and batching transactions.
1) Segwit adoption has not increased.
http://segwit.party/charts/
2) Num transactions has been going down but transaction value is also going down.
https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume
If more transactions were batches shouldn t transaction value being going up?
I believe its just lower transaction volume.
Re: The CEO of Bitcoin got arrested for money laundering!!! 100% not 'fake news'.
For details, heres the video interview with the person that was arrested.
https://youtu.be/Tu7nl_-vBns
https://youtu.be/Tu7nl_-vBns
I dont think a lottery is a good idea but I believe that incentives to full node operators is a good idea. This is because full nodes are important members of the network.
I understand that there are currently enough full nodes on the networks. But the amount of full nodes cannot be guaranteed by goodwill alone. In order to guarantee that there is always a sufficient amount of full nodes an incentive is necessary.
The issue at hand is than, which full node shall incentives be given to.
The common issue with this scenario is that, it is easy for someone to game the system by running multiple copies of a full node. To combat this issue, we should give incentives to full nodes that are backed by x amount of bitcoin. The amount of incentivized full nodes will thus be limited by the total amount of bitcoin in circulation.
I understand that there are currently enough full nodes on the networks. But the amount of full nodes cannot be guaranteed by goodwill alone. In order to guarantee that there is always a sufficient amount of full nodes an incentive is necessary.
The issue at hand is than, which full node shall incentives be given to.
The common issue with this scenario is that, it is easy for someone to game the system by running multiple copies of a full node. To combat this issue, we should give incentives to full nodes that are backed by x amount of bitcoin. The amount of incentivized full nodes will thus be limited by the total amount of bitcoin in circulation.
This system doesnt need to be implemented as a Cryptocurrency. Just a normal database would achieve the same effect without needing to pay miners.
Another problem here is that the admin would need to store the cash locally because if he were to store it in the bank he may or may not get back the same bill unless a safe deposit box is used.
Even if all the bills are recorded online there is a high risk of robbery. People are smart, theyll work around any limitation if there were money to be made.
Lastly, this is not a trustless system. People have to have trust in you and your team. Whats stopping you and your team from engaging in fractional reserve banking after youve recorded the bills? What happens if your company go out of business? From whom do user recover their money if you and your team were to disappear?
Another problem here is that the admin would need to store the cash locally because if he were to store it in the bank he may or may not get back the same bill unless a safe deposit box is used.
Even if all the bills are recorded online there is a high risk of robbery. People are smart, theyll work around any limitation if there were money to be made.
Lastly, this is not a trustless system. People have to have trust in you and your team. Whats stopping you and your team from engaging in fractional reserve banking after youve recorded the bills? What happens if your company go out of business? From whom do user recover their money if you and your team were to disappear?
I've heard about this way back but only recently started to read more about it.
For those who do n't know what I am talking about check these links: https://www.daglabs.com/ , https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/1159.pdf
Tho one thing is not clear to me. I get it in this protocols miners are like going rouge and simply mine as many blocks as they can and thus creating this graph of blocks. The problem that I see is that it is not neccessery to mine blocks which will contain the same transactions in them. As I see this it is just puting more weight on the network in terms of how large this DAG can actually be. Yes it can scale but then to run a node you will have to have good internet speed and a lot of space on your hard drive with some of these blocks being totaly unnecessary added to the network.
Can somebody shed some light and explain me why is this proposal good or you belive it is bad, why so?
For those who do n't know what I am talking about check these links: https://www.daglabs.com/ , https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/1159.pdf
Tho one thing is not clear to me. I get it in this protocols miners are like going rouge and simply mine as many blocks as they can and thus creating this graph of blocks. The problem that I see is that it is not neccessery to mine blocks which will contain the same transactions in them. As I see this it is just puting more weight on the network in terms of how large this DAG can actually be. Yes it can scale but then to run a node you will have to have good internet speed and a lot of space on your hard drive with some of these blocks being totaly unnecessary added to the network.
Can somebody shed some light and explain me why is this proposal good or you belive it is bad, why so?
This proposal changes the trade off needed to achieve faster confirmation times.
Assuming we dont have lightning or any off chain solutions the classic trade off is between security and scalability. This is because as you lower blocktime or increase block size there comes a point where security is significantly reduced.
The proposal changes the trade offs to a trade off between (network & storage) and security. This proposal would allow significantly lower block times which in turn would significantly reduce confirmation time but the cost is larger storage capacity and more bandwidth.
In my opinion, this change would significantly increase confirmation speed but lower the amount of nodes due to the higher requirements. But I digress, it really depends on the rate of growth of storage capacity and network bandwidth.
Fragmentation.
Blockchain is based on a peer to peer system. So each peer/node have the freedom to choose which version of the software to run. This makes it difficult to implement significant changes to the codebase because each peer may have different views on the changes.
As to private chains, I dont see a point for it. Without the hashpower backing it, it would be the same as a normal database. As is the case with most ICOs.
Blockchain is based on a peer to peer system. So each peer/node have the freedom to choose which version of the software to run. This makes it difficult to implement significant changes to the codebase because each peer may have different views on the changes.
As to private chains, I dont see a point for it. Without the hashpower backing it, it would be the same as a normal database. As is the case with most ICOs.
Re: Merit point giveaway for alt coin miners Question to mod of altcoin mining.
If threads like this are required, doesnt that mean that the merit system is kinda broken?
I dont mean that the merit system is bad, its good in the sense that it encourages useleful posts. But the merit sources seems to be a little too strict as to the criteria in which merits are given.
Your thoughts?
I dont mean that the merit system is bad, its good in the sense that it encourages useleful posts. But the merit sources seems to be a little too strict as to the criteria in which merits are given.
Your thoughts?
Re: PoW heavy computation is a feature, not a bug --> please critique
Thanks for those answers!
With this in mind, the only time a miner would have the incentive to shutdown a ASIC miner would be when the profit of the block generation would not even cover the electricity consumption in the case they won it? otherwise it would be kept on at a static hash rate per ASIC machine with a fixed power consumption. Awesome information. thanks.
With this in mind, the only time a miner would have the incentive to shutdown a ASIC miner would be when the profit of the block generation would not even cover the electricity consumption in the case they won it? otherwise it would be kept on at a static hash rate per ASIC machine with a fixed power consumption. Awesome information. thanks.
This may not always be true. For example miners will sometimes continue to mine if they think that the price of bitcoin will increase in the future.
I believe the transaction fees on the Blockchain will always be higher than on LN because if transactions on the Blockchain becomes cheaper than using LN people would just transact using the Blockchain instead. The inverse would also be true. This would continue until an equilibrium is reached.
Re: Blockchain analysis tools to calculate the possible impact of the LN?
Is there currently tools out there that can calculate the average percentage of transactions, based on their value that
would show the possible influence, if these micro transactions were taken off-chain with the Lightning Network. We know the
Lightning Network is more focussed on micro transactions and if these transactions are taken off-chain, then the MemPool
will be basically empty.
https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd {not what I want}
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-count {Also not what I want}
It should drill down much deeper to show, say transactions between X amount {or BTC value} to Y amount, make up this
or that percentage of the total transactions for a predefined time. Hope you get what I am saying.
If we can evaluate the impact, we could speed up adoption of the LN. {Yes, I know it is still experimental}
would show the possible influence, if these micro transactions were taken off-chain with the Lightning Network. We know the
Lightning Network is more focussed on micro transactions and if these transactions are taken off-chain, then the MemPool
will be basically empty.
https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd {not what I want}
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-count {Also not what I want}
It should drill down much deeper to show, say transactions between X amount {or BTC value} to Y amount, make up this
or that percentage of the total transactions for a predefined time. Hope you get what I am saying.
If we can evaluate the impact, we could speed up adoption of the LN. {Yes, I know it is still experimental}
Basically you want a chart where
x= time
y= percentage of transaction under z amount in the mempool.
Is that correct?
Well, you are getting close. The graph needs several inputs. One axis should reflect different transaction sizes and the other
axis, what the percentage impact those transactions sizes will have on the MemPool. To determine that, we need to analyse
how many of the total transactions {average} are micro transactions. We then look at the MemPool and extract the impact
it would have had, if it was not there. {because it would have been more effective if it was running off-chain on the LN}
Rather than having different transaction sizes on one axis wouldnt it be more efficient to represent different transaction sizes as different lines through the same graph albeit with different colors?
bitcoind is a Bitcoin service daemon, which is a program that runs in the background and with which a user can't usually interact directly during it's runtime. This is a full node server that downloads that creates a P2P network and synchronizes the blockchain and verifies transactions and blocks.
bitcoin-cli is a command-line interface for Bitcoin Core client that connects to a running instance of bitcoind daemon. User can interact with this program and do any necessary functions with it that will control the bitcoind service as well as the possibility of using a Bitcoin wallet to send and receive funds, among other functions that Bitcoin Core client provides.
bitcoin-qt is a program that, unlike bitcoind and blitcoin-cli, has a graphical environment. It acts as both bitcoind and bitcoin-cli, as it is running a full node service while providing a user with a graphical environment to control that service, as well as other wallet and non-wallet functions. It also provides a regular command-line interface when you go to Help->Debug window->Console.
bitcoin-cli is a command-line interface for Bitcoin Core client that connects to a running instance of bitcoind daemon. User can interact with this program and do any necessary functions with it that will control the bitcoind service as well as the possibility of using a Bitcoin wallet to send and receive funds, among other functions that Bitcoin Core client provides.
bitcoin-qt is a program that, unlike bitcoind and blitcoin-cli, has a graphical environment. It acts as both bitcoind and bitcoin-cli, as it is running a full node service while providing a user with a graphical environment to control that service, as well as other wallet and non-wallet functions. It also provides a regular command-line interface when you go to Help->Debug window->Console.
Thanks! If
Then, what runnable program should I distribute to normal users? (Most of them would just need wallet service (send, receive money, check history))
bitcoin-qt (mycoin-qt) is it? But this also at first should synchronize all the past data?
For normal users I would recommend using SPV like Electrum because you dont have to sync the entire Blockchain.
How to make that?
https://electrum.org/#home
bitcoind is a Bitcoin service daemon, which is a program that runs in the background and with which a user can't usually interact directly during it's runtime. This is a full node server that downloads that creates a P2P network and synchronizes the blockchain and verifies transactions and blocks.
bitcoin-cli is a command-line interface for Bitcoin Core client that connects to a running instance of bitcoind daemon. User can interact with this program and do any necessary functions with it that will control the bitcoind service as well as the possibility of using a Bitcoin wallet to send and receive funds, among other functions that Bitcoin Core client provides.
bitcoin-qt is a program that, unlike bitcoind and blitcoin-cli, has a graphical environment. It acts as both bitcoind and bitcoin-cli, as it is running a full node service while providing a user with a graphical environment to control that service, as well as other wallet and non-wallet functions. It also provides a regular command-line interface when you go to Help->Debug window->Console.
bitcoin-cli is a command-line interface for Bitcoin Core client that connects to a running instance of bitcoind daemon. User can interact with this program and do any necessary functions with it that will control the bitcoind service as well as the possibility of using a Bitcoin wallet to send and receive funds, among other functions that Bitcoin Core client provides.
bitcoin-qt is a program that, unlike bitcoind and blitcoin-cli, has a graphical environment. It acts as both bitcoind and bitcoin-cli, as it is running a full node service while providing a user with a graphical environment to control that service, as well as other wallet and non-wallet functions. It also provides a regular command-line interface when you go to Help->Debug window->Console.
Thanks!
Then, what runnable program should I distribute to normal users? (Most of them would just need wallet service (send, receive money, check history))
bitcoin-qt (mycoin-qt) is it? But this also at first should synchronize all the past data?
For normal users I would recommend using SPV like Electrum because you dont have to sync the entire Blockchain.
Re: Blockchain analysis tools to calculate the possible impact of the LN?
Is there currently tools out there that can calculate the average percentage of transactions, based on their value that
would show the possible influence, if these micro transactions were taken off-chain with the Lightning Network. We know the
Lightning Network is more focussed on micro transactions and if these transactions are taken off-chain, then the MemPool
will be basically empty.
https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd {not what I want}
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-count {Also not what I want}
It should drill down much deeper to show, say transactions between X amount {or BTC value} to Y amount, make up this
or that percentage of the total transactions for a predefined time. Hope you get what I am saying.
If we can evaluate the impact, we could speed up adoption of the LN. {Yes, I know it is still experimental}
would show the possible influence, if these micro transactions were taken off-chain with the Lightning Network. We know the
Lightning Network is more focussed on micro transactions and if these transactions are taken off-chain, then the MemPool
will be basically empty.
https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd {not what I want}
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-count {Also not what I want}
It should drill down much deeper to show, say transactions between X amount {or BTC value} to Y amount, make up this
or that percentage of the total transactions for a predefined time. Hope you get what I am saying.
If we can evaluate the impact, we could speed up adoption of the LN. {Yes, I know it is still experimental}
Basically you want a chart where
x= time
y= percentage of transaction under z amount in the mempool.
Is that correct?
Hey guys,
Im trying to build an alternative interface for Nicehash that going to be donation based.
Can you please let me know the most important thing you always look at when you visit your profile?
Is there any type of information youll like to see included in your profile, which is not already there?
Are there anything with the profile your unsatisfied with and why?
Thanks guys for your help.
Im trying to build an alternative interface for Nicehash that going to be donation based.
Can you please let me know the most important thing you always look at when you visit your profile?
Is there any type of information youll like to see included in your profile, which is not already there?
Are there anything with the profile your unsatisfied with and why?
Thanks guys for your help.
So bitcoin block generation speed is 10 minutes, is this minimum transaction speed?
Then how can faster it?
I find at 'chainparams.cpp', consensus.nPowTargetSpacing = 10 * 60;
So this is 10 minutes, so if I change it to 0.1 * 60, then transaction speed also become 6 seconds?
What else parameters should I change to speed up?
Then how can faster it?
I find at 'chainparams.cpp', consensus.nPowTargetSpacing = 10 * 60;
So this is 10 minutes, so if I change it to 0.1 * 60, then transaction speed also become 6 seconds?
What else parameters should I change to speed up?
That will speed up transactions but you may not have enough time for all the nodes to record the transaction. If you do change it that way you should take a look at the reward amount for each block as decreasing blocktime will increase the supply of bitcoin introduced to the system.
To increase transaction speed you may also want to take a look at blocksize.
Then how ethereum block generation time is so fast? (15 seconds maybe?) Is there enough time for nodes to record the transaction?
And what is proper fastest time to wait all nodes record?
Pre Segwit full nodes have a max blocksize of 1MB for bitcoin. In Ethereum the blocksize is variable but currently its around 22KB. If the blocksize is small you can afford faster block times.
The fastest time, in my opinion is fairly arbitrary. Just put in what works for you. But test the hell out of it before you go live.