Search content
Sort by
Showing 16 of 16 results by archaeopteryx
Re: DroneDash.net - Buy Drones With Bitcoin! Official DJI Phantom Dealer!
Has anyone successfully purchased from this vendor? Everything looks legit, but I'm wary of the large number of bitcoin scams that float around. I want to get a Phantom 3 and have some extra Bitcoins sitting around.
Coffee. We have an Bitcoin ATM here at the local coffee shop.
I'm moving to your city. That's awesome.
I am planning on opening brewery and accepting. I would be shipping with in the US. I am located in milwaukee, wisconsin.
I would buy. If it's decent beer, I would buy more.
Did you look at ECIES?
No, but as I understand the wikipedia article, it seems a bit more complicated (or maybe it's just because I'm not comfortable with KDFs and HMACs)Can it be used with ECDSA private keys?
Yeah that's true it's really similar! Not being a crypto guy (even though I'm rather good at maths) I can't imagine I'm the only one who tried that kind of things, so why is it not used?
Also, as I understand the article my implementation seems secure
I'm not a crypto expert, but if your implementation is truly the same as ElGamal, well it is being used. For example, Pretty Good Privacy implementations use ElGamal as one of the options.
Re: Social security is the govs way of saying you are too stupid to save your own $$
You're fucking stupid.
You are so ridiculously naive, it's pathetic.
I understand we aren't going to solve the on-going debate between collectivism and individualism in this thread, or push understanding of the difference between society and government. However, it is enjoyable to debate the details and refine our understanding, until it resorts to this.
To sum it up, we have several fine thinkers in this thread.
And then this one...
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m27z329S401qkp3qu.gif
Pretty much
I never understood people that spend more time insulting the person they are responding to than actually progressing the argument.
Perhaps because the stupid person needs to be made aware of the stupidity of his claims and/or statements?
If that's your goal you are doing a poor job. People don't respond well to emotional and personal attacks--it doesn't make them realize they hold stupid beliefs but usually only hardens their position. I know from experience because I used to believe some stupid things. It wasn't ad hominems that changed my mind, it was rational discussion and friendly discourse which prompted further research of my own.
Are you aware of the history between myrkul and I? Probably not. Don't make our fight yours.
You're right I probably am not. Did he leave you for another man? That's unfortunate, but doesn't change the validity of my points. If you're here to change someone's mind you are going about it the wrong way. If you're here simply to fling poo, well, that's your choice. It just seems a poor one to me.
You should take courses in Macro economy to understand more about inflation. Why do you think the central bank of Japan (BoJ) has fighted deflation for more than 2 decades?
Deflation is bad for the economy! If your 100$ bill would be worth more each year you would postpone your consumption and the economy would shrink each year (which is case in deflationary economies such as Japan).
Deflation is bad for the economy! If your 100$ bill would be worth more each year you would postpone your consumption and the economy would shrink each year (which is case in deflationary economies such as Japan).
And maybe you should read some of the thousands of posts in hundreds of threads discussing this idea. We aren't ignorant of the nonsense ideas to be found in books with "macroeconomics" printed on their covers, we actively reject them.
There really are hundreds of threads on inflation vs. deflation, and you've added nothing of substance to the discussion.
I know that some bitcoin enthusiasts prefer bitcoin over FIAT-currencies since it cannot be printed when 21 million is reached vs fiat currencies such as the Zimbabwe Dollar...
But you hate inflation on wrong reasons - the fiat inflation of fiat is bad because we cannot predict politicians or central bank behaviour. Bitcoin algorithm is the opposite, it is predictable and I dont see any problem with an built-in inflation of X % per annum for infinity, therefore inflation in cryptocurrencies is nothing bad. It prevents hording.
And it encourages spending bitcoin so that the bitcoin economy can grow!
Bitcoin was designed the way it was quite deliberately. The intelligent fellow (or fellows) who dreamt up and implemented the brilliant idea that is Bitcoin didn't want it to be inflationary. You may be correct that an inflationary cryptocurrency would work better than Bitcoin, but that doesn't change the fact that Bitcoin is not an inflationary cryptocurrency. In other words, rally support to your idea and create your own cryptocurrency. Maybe call it "FriedmanCoin". Then we can see empirically which one does better. My bet is still on Bitcoin.
Es triste la verdad, y frustrante. Es como si les dijeras que hay un tío en la esquina regalando billetes de 500 euros y ni siquiera asoman la cabeza para ver si es cierto. La mayoría ni se molestan en informarse.
Normal, nadie regala billetes de 500 y nadie dará veracidad a una exposición del tipo "aquí puedes doblar tu dinero cada X días". Cuándo hablo de btc a las personas, lo último que introduzco en la conversación son las aventuras del mercado de intercambio, justo después del tema del minado.
Hay que hacer énfasis en sus características de importancia; descentralizado, rápido, comisiones baratas, técnicamente asombroso, fácil de usar por comercios, etc etc.
Hay que traer a la gente a los bitcoins por estos valores, y no por que sea una buena inversión. Si traemos usuarios al btc, su valor subirá legítimamente. Si traemos especuladores el valor subirá, pero...
Mi opinión.
Creo que estas son palabras sabias. Me temo que el aumento reciente de los precios es insostenible, porque no puedo imaginar la base de usuarios ha crecido tan rápido. Debemos seguir diciendo a la gente acerca de Bitcoins y apoyar a las empresas que aceptan la moneda con el fin de construir una economía Bitcoin legítimo. Poco a poco y sin duda vamos a ganar.
En lo que respecta a OP:
Esta noche me dijo dos nuevos conocidos acerca de Bitcoin. Ambos estaban impresionados y podría considerar la posibilidad de utilizarla en el futuro.
Re: Social security is the govs way of saying you are too stupid to save your own $$
You're fucking stupid.
You are so ridiculously naive, it's pathetic.
I understand we aren't going to solve the on-going debate between collectivism and individualism in this thread, or push understanding of the difference between society and government. However, it is enjoyable to debate the details and refine our understanding, until it resorts to this.
To sum it up, we have several fine thinkers in this thread.
And then this one...
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m27z329S401qkp3qu.gif
Pretty much
I never understood people that spend more time insulting the person they are responding to than actually progressing the argument.
Perhaps because the stupid person needs to be made aware of the stupidity of his claims and/or statements?
If that's your goal you are doing a poor job. People don't respond well to emotional and personal attacks--it doesn't make them realize they hold stupid beliefs but usually only hardens their position. I know from experience because I used to believe some stupid things. It wasn't ad hominems that changed my mind, it was rational discussion and friendly discourse which prompted further research of my own.
21000000 * COIN is the theoretical upperbound of bitcoin's entire money supply. Of course no one account or transaction can have more than that number, so it is used to check that a given money value is within the valid range.
To understand how this limit came about, you need to understand the function GetBlockValue() that give rise to the upperbound of 21M * COIN: MAX_MONEY = 2 * 210000 * 50 * COIN
To understand how this limit came about, you need to understand the function GetBlockValue() that give rise to the upperbound of 21M * COIN: MAX_MONEY = 2 * 210000 * 50 * COIN
Code:
int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees)
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 210000 blocks, which will occur approximately every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 210000 blocks, which will occur approximately every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
I think I understand the GetBlockValue function (I spent most of my allotted time in the newbie pool digging through the Bitcoin source code and asking some questions). The math works out to be 20,999,999.9769 total Bitcoins mined at block #6,930,000 if I calculated it correctly. What I don't quite understand is the purpose for this line:
Code:
inline bool MoneyRange(int64 nValue) { return (nValue >= 0 && nValue <= MAX_MONEY); }
as a transaction will never even come close to that amount, and neither will any given Bitcoin address. Given the ~21 million COIN limit created by GetBlockValue, why is it necessary to check "nValue" to make sure it is within 0 - 21,000,000?
So there's this magical limit of ~21 million bitcoins that can theoretically exist at max. Many assumptions about the future of bitcoin are based on this number.
How easy / hard would it be to change this limit? It seems, this function controls how many coins are given to miners for solving a block. If developers decided to change this function, the 21 million number would change too, right? Or is the 21 million number somehow coded deeper in the system?
How easy / hard would it be to change this limit? It seems, this function controls how many coins are given to miners for solving a block. If developers decided to change this function, the 21 million number would change too, right? Or is the 21 million number somehow coded deeper in the system?
I'm still working through understanding the Bitcoin protocol, but there's also these lines
Code:
/** No amount larger than this (in satoshi) is valid */
static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 21000000 * COIN;
inline bool MoneyRange(int64 nValue) { return (nValue >= 0 && nValue <= MAX_MONEY); }
static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 21000000 * COIN;
inline bool MoneyRange(int64 nValue) { return (nValue >= 0 && nValue <= MAX_MONEY); }
from the main.h file. I'm not sure what exactly this limits, (the amount of BTC in a single account, the amount of BTC in a transaction?) and would be curious if a more advanced programmer could explain it to me. This probably isn't considered to be coded any "deeper" in the system, as it's not something stored back in an early block, but it seems to be some other kind of constraint on the number of coins.
Re: The Definition of the BitCoin Limit (Techies and Old Timers Come Hither)
Ahhhh, it's all starting to make sense. So, dissecting this code:
I'm guessing that nHeight is the current block number, and then nFees is all the transaction fees that are associated with the block. So then we have
as the definition of the reward for any given block. "COIN" must be the elusive definition of the Bitcoin that I've been trying to find. Then,
this is bit-shifting the block reward by integer values of the current block divided by the halving block number. So this bit shift value was initially zero until we reached block #210,000 at which point nHeight/210000 = 1. So really what we have for nSubsidy is a 64-bit integer with an initial value of:
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000001 00101010 00000101 11110010 00000000 (dec: 5,000,000,000 = 50 BTC)
and which is then shifted an extra bit every time the block count reaches another multiple of 210,0000. Then the block reward added to the transaction fees are returned by the function.
Thanks, Foxpup, this has cleared a lot of things up for me.
EDIT: I just did a case-sensitive word search through about 90% of the Bitcoin source code in order to find this:
Exactly what I was expecting, but good to see it and know that it is in "util.h". I've learned things today. And, oh look, my four hours in the Newbie pool are up. No one can say I wasted them.
Code:
int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees)
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 210000 blocks, which will occur approximately every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 210000 blocks, which will occur approximately every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
I'm guessing that nHeight is the current block number, and then nFees is all the transaction fees that are associated with the block. So then we have
Code:
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
as the definition of the reward for any given block. "COIN" must be the elusive definition of the Bitcoin that I've been trying to find. Then,
Code:
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight/210000);
this is bit-shifting the block reward by integer values of the current block divided by the halving block number. So this bit shift value was initially zero until we reached block #210,000 at which point nHeight/210000 = 1. So really what we have for nSubsidy is a 64-bit integer with an initial value of:
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000001 00101010 00000101 11110010 00000000 (dec: 5,000,000,000 = 50 BTC)
and which is then shifted an extra bit every time the block count reaches another multiple of 210,0000. Then the block reward added to the transaction fees are returned by the function.
Thanks, Foxpup, this has cleared a lot of things up for me.
EDIT: I just did a case-sensitive word search through about 90% of the Bitcoin source code in order to find this:
Code:
static const int64 COIN = 100000000;
Exactly what I was expecting, but good to see it and know that it is in "util.h". I've learned things today. And, oh look, my four hours in the Newbie pool are up. No one can say I wasted them.
The Definition of the BitCoin Limit (Techies and Old Timers Come Hither)
So while I relax in the Newbie pool I'm trying to understand some of the more technical aspects of BitCoin. Over and over again we hear and read that there is a limit of 21 million coins that can ever be minted, but I'm interested in what that actually means in terms of BitCoin source code. Is this limit due to the fact that there is a variable defined with a certain bit-length limiting how high of numbers can be expressed? Or is it due to the algorithm for mining rewards where every 210k blocks the reward is halved? Something like:
50*210,000 + 25*210,000 + 12.5*210,000 + . . . ~= 21,000,000 BTC?
I've been digging through the forum and wiki and even making small forays into the source code to try to understand this, but I don't have a lot of programming or crypto knowledge. Any explanations from knowledgeable individuals would be appreciated.
50*210,000 + 25*210,000 + 12.5*210,000 + . . . ~= 21,000,000 BTC?
I've been digging through the forum and wiki and even making small forays into the source code to try to understand this, but I don't have a lot of programming or crypto knowledge. Any explanations from knowledgeable individuals would be appreciated.
To be honest, unless you already have GPUs sitting around or you plan on buying ASICs it's probably not going to be worth it to get into mining at this stage. If you spend money on a GPU-style mining rig it may never pay itself off.
You realize if you are successful you could brute force ANY BTC wallet whether you had legitimate claim to it or not.
In other words, bitcoin would be essentially dead, since you could take from any arbitrary wallet. You would start with the biggest ones, of course, and eventually word would get out, and bitcoin would be officially dead.
So far, since the 2009 release of the bitcoin protocol, nobody has hacked an arbitrary wallet. This is presumably not for lack of trying.
I would, to quote Justin Bieber, "Never say never," but if you want a way to open a wallet, you might be brute forcing for a long, long time.
In other words, bitcoin would be essentially dead, since you could take from any arbitrary wallet. You would start with the biggest ones, of course, and eventually word would get out, and bitcoin would be officially dead.
So far, since the 2009 release of the bitcoin protocol, nobody has hacked an arbitrary wallet. This is presumably not for lack of trying.
I would, to quote Justin Bieber, "Never say never," but if you want a way to open a wallet, you might be brute forcing for a long, long time.
OP:
Quote
So I have modified it to brute force based off a base password that I know is correct, so I'm only have to brute force between 6-8 characters which is feasible.
He knows part of the password so has some a priori information to go off of, not like cracking a private key. It still might take a while.