Search content
Sort by

Showing 20 of 26 results by mandelbert
Post
Topic
Board Armory
Topic OP
Armory Monotization Idea
by
mandelbert
on 13/10/2016, 22:06:11 UTC
I have been using armory for a long time and I love that fact that my wallet is generated from a seed which I only need to back up once.

However, the seed obviously does not contain any data about the transactions I made. If my computer will crash, I will lose all the comments I wrote on my transactions. For example, "Paying $500 for a GPU" will be gone, and I'll be left wondering what did I spend 2 bitcoins on.

To solve that, I backup my wallet after every transaction, which kind of defeats the purpose.

So here is my idea: have armory automatically back up encrypted transaction comments to a centralized server. I'll be happy to pay, say $1 or $2 per month for this service, and if a couple 1000s armory users choose this, it can generate some income to the maintainers.

To clarify:

 * No wallet keys are ever sent, so it is impossible to steal funds from the backups.
 * The comments should be encrypted by a client side key (perhaps derived from the wallet seed?), so even the server cannot decrypt them.
 * The data the server needs to store is very small, only comments and some ids, so something like Amazon's S3 can be used very cheaply.
 * It can be nicely integrated into armory so backup happens automatically and restore is user friendly.
 * Payment for this service can also, obviously, be nicely integrated into armory. It's a wallet after all Smiley

What do you think?
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Topic OP
Why sell now?
by
mandelbert
on 24/10/2015, 21:34:16 UTC
It's pretty obvious that the long down trend in bitcoin is over and we are starting to head up. The last few weeks have given us nice increases in price. It's also obvious to any long term observer that once this rocket starts to take off, the current price (~280) will seem miniscule. Why sell now and trade against the trend? I would set some stops to protect myself, but let the price go up more before considering to sell. If anything, it is buying time right now.
Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: What is the right and fair way to stop Mike Hearn?
by
mandelbert
on 25/01/2014, 06:32:12 UTC
In this case the fact that the remote client (wallet) is being persuaded of is that you know a valid e-passport that hashes to a particular value. It's anonymous because you can't reverse a hash. You can convince the wallet of this without actually revealing your passport data.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what's preventing a government from running the hash function on all the passports and de-anonymizing all the hashes? They own the passports database after all.
Post
Topic
Board Service Discussion
Re: More bad news: Now BTC China cannot take CNY deposits of any kind
by
mandelbert
on 18/12/2013, 08:42:45 UTC
I love how governments preventing their people from using their money as they see fit is bad news for Bitcoin.

Strange world we live in.

This. So true. I just hope others will see the truth in that as well.
Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: China, Norway, Switzerland economies to take an Epic beating
by
mandelbert
on 17/12/2013, 01:59:17 UTC
Btw the photo is photoshopped or real?

Are you seriously asking?HuhHuh??

It is photoshopped. The real picture has Godzilla eating some buildings too, but it was removed to prevent panic.
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: How to structure mutually conditional transactions?
by
mandelbert
on 08/12/2013, 06:11:40 UTC
Bitcoin transaction can have multiple inputs as well as multiple outputs. In your case, you can build one transaction with two inputs (A and C) and two outputs (B and D).
Post
Topic
Board Marketplace
Re: I will pay 0.3 BTC for an insurance policy against btc-e
by
mandelbert
on 06/12/2013, 08:42:41 UTC
Well the point was not starting an argument. It was asking for a service, and doing some kind of an experiment to see if it will actually work along the way. The experiment obviously failed. I actually expected that in a way, I guess. Oh well...

To defend myself a bit:

* At my age I do pay about ~$100 per year for my life insurance. I don't expect to pay that when I'm 80 though. Again it's all about probabilities.
* I am working with btc so there are no fiat delays
* I specifically said that if btc-e is down for an hour or so that is fine. That includes ddos.
* The eight day term is there exactly to protect the insurer if btc-e is down due to ddos during the last hour of the 7-day period. They have additional day to recover before the insurance activates. I was actually trying to be fair.
* Hiring someone to hack btc-e and getting measly 250 BTC through some elaborate forum scam? If I was really aiming to hack btc-e I would aim for 1000s, considering their volume, and I would keep it secret...
* "for any reason" - that means other scenarios I might not think about such as btc-e having a rogue employee, disk crash, building fire, whatever. Anything catastrophic enough such that it affects all users and as such is easily verifiable. Not me being silly and forgetting a password.
* With a 2 out of 3 key scheme the escrow does not have to actually hold 250 btc, only to hold one key and mediate in case of a dispute.

If you read my terms closely you will see I was actually trying to be fair. The only thing you could argue I am not being fair about is the price. But that's up to how you estimate the probabilities. If instead of 0.3 btc I was offering 100 btc, would you go for it now? What's your price then?
Post
Topic
Board Marketplace
Re: I will pay 0.3 BTC for an insurance policy against btc-e
by
mandelbert
on 06/12/2013, 05:05:36 UTC
OK, I see that asking for 250 BTC is probably too much. I was hoping some old miner with deep pockets will pop up, doesn't seem so.

Suppose instead of 250 BTC it's only, say 10 BTC. Other terms stay the same. What would be your price then? I won't hold anyone for it - just interested in what people think.
Post
Topic
Board Marketplace
Re: I will pay 0.3 BTC for an insurance policy against btc-e
by
mandelbert
on 06/12/2013, 04:30:53 UTC
This is what insurance companies do all the time.  

I'm afraid though that it is going to be hard to find anyone to take you up on your offer because on the surface it doesn't sound that great, risk 250 BTC for .3 BTC.  

An insurance company might also want some verification that you actually have 250 BTC in btc-e however and that when it is recovered if btc-e goes down the 250 BTC go to them (since they will have already paid you "your" 250 btc).  However, you've explicitly said you wont verify that, so this is just basically a short term option (or high odds bet) on btc-e.

Good Luck!


Thanks. You are mostly right, except I think there is no "my" 250 btc and "their" 250 btc. If I buy fire insurance and my house burns down (say 250K in damage), my insurance company does not expect me to give them the house after it's rebuilt. That's why I pay the premium for - to cover the damage and that's all.

And a fire insurance for a 250K house is probably about ~300$ per year (depending on various factors). And that's for a _whole year_. I am looking for coverage for _one week_.
Post
Topic
Board Marketplace
Re: I will pay 0.3 BTC for an insurance policy against btc-e
by
mandelbert
on 06/12/2013, 04:23:05 UTC
To the naysayers, I'll say this. Do you have life insurance? A typical life insurance will pay 250K, and for that you pay ~100$ per year. Who wants to risk 250K for 100$ per year? Is this a joke? No, it's called insurance and it's based on probabilities.

Post
Topic
Board Marketplace
Re: I will pay 0.3 BTC for an insurance policy against btc-e
by
mandelbert
on 05/12/2013, 05:24:00 UTC
I don't think anyone would do this, why risk 250 BTC for 0.3 BTC?  Huh

It's a matter of probabilities - if you think the chances of btc-e going down _during one week_ are less than 0.12%, then this is a good deal.

You have insurance on your car right? This is basically the same thing.

Also, you don't have to risk 250 BTC. As I said, I might consider paying proportionally so you can put 50 and I'll pay 0.06. For one week, that's 6.4% interest rate so it's actually quite a good offer.
Post
Topic
Board Marketplace
Topic OP
I will pay 0.3 BTC for an insurance policy against btc-e
by
mandelbert
on 05/12/2013, 05:16:05 UTC
I have some money in btc-e.
I want to move my money out, but due to withdrawal limits it will probably take me some time.
I rather avoid losing money due to btc-e.com being hacked, disappearing, defaulting etc.

Here is the deal i'm offering:

1. I will pay 0.3 BTC to escrow
2. You will pay 250 BTC to escrow (or less - see below)
3. The insurance period will start immediately after both payments are confirmed by the escrow
4. The insurance period will last one week (7 calendar days = 168 hours)
5. During the insurance period, in the case btc-e.com is hacked, defaults, disappears, or I am otherwise unable to withdraw my money from it for any reason, AND this situation is still occurring 192 hours (8 calendar days) after the beginning of insurance period, I will receive 250 BTC from the escrow. You will keep the insurance premium.
6. If #5 above does not happen (btc-e.com is not hacked, defaults, etc.), the 250 BTC will be returned to you after 7 calendar days, together with the premium.
7. Note that I am not interested in the case where btc-e.com is down for an hour or so and then recovers - only if I am unable to get my money out after 8 calendar days from the beginning of the insurance period, will the insurance be activated.

The event of btc-e.com being hacked, defaulting, disappearing and so on should be catastrophic enough to be easily determined. Also, I will not have to prove that I actually had 250 BTC in btc-e (I might have more or less at any given time). And no - I don't plan on hacking btc-e myself  Smiley

I will pay escrow fees.

If you have 250 BTC and you think the chances of such event happening _during one week_ are lower than 0.12% (0.3/250), then this should be a good deal for you.
Also, if you have less than 250 BTC, I might consider paying proportionally to what you are able to put (e.g. for coverage of 125 BTC I'll pay 0.15 BTC). 50 BTC minimum please.

I will post the results of the agreement in this thread. This is also an opportunity for you to increase your trust.

I don't think this has been tried before, it will be interesting to see how it will turn out.
Post
Topic
Board Legal
Re: CoinLenders Lawsuit
by
mandelbert
on 26/11/2013, 05:31:28 UTC
count me in, 180.2545789 in CL. TF is not responding to my mails.
Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Technical Support
Re: I generated an address that already exists
by
mandelbert
on 20/10/2013, 07:56:51 UTC
Are you *sure* you didn't own that address already?

If not, it is VASTLY more probable you (and however generated this address before) just unearthed a bug in bitcoin's PRNG. Could you give more details - which OS and OpenSSL you have installed?

I find it *extremely* hard to believe you actually caused a collision. Not now, not in a 1000 years.
Post
Topic
Board Securities
Re: [BTC-EQTY] A new Bitcoin Investment Fund
by
mandelbert
on 22/05/2013, 07:51:15 UTC
Sounds interesting. I have a few questions:

1. You say the fund is a "balanced risk fund" and "will stick to moderate risk asset shares". I'm curious, how do you evaluate risk? I mean, what do you consider moderate as opposed to low or high?

2. You say you have "extensive experience in share-trading and investment products". Could you elaborate on that a bit - how long have you been trading/investing, how much money was involved, did you handle others people money, how successful your investments were, etc.
Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: Say Bob sends Alice
by
mandelbert
on 21/05/2013, 04:11:43 UTC
Can you provide more context? What is it that you are trying to do?
Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: Wallet Hack on 4/25
by
mandelbert
on 27/04/2013, 20:11:43 UTC
I got this email too:

----
Authorize log-in attempt

An attempt to login to your blockchain.info wallet was made from an unknown browser. Please confirm the following details are correct:

Time: 2013-04-26 22:03:19
IP Address: 46.167.245.50 (Czech Republic)
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051111 Firefox/1.5

If the above details are correct please use the following login link:

https://blockchain.info/wallet/

If this login attempt was made by you this email can be safely ignored however you may wish to change your wallet alias.
----

I don't have any coins there, so good luck with that. However, I used a common word as the wallet identifier, as some other people here apparently did. I am guessing someone is blindly trying weak identifier/password combinations.
Post
Topic
Board Securities
Re: High Frequency Trading Algorithm ETF IPO
by
mandelbert
on 23/04/2013, 05:30:39 UTC
I am interested. However, I would like to get more data:

1. What part of the profit (if any) will be fed back into the algorithm and what part will be given out as dividends?
2. What happens if btc-e is ddosed/shuts down/your account is hacked?
3. How reliable is your infrastructure? Is it running on a dedicated server/ec2? How is it monitored?
4. I assume most trading activities carry risk. Do you have any risk assessment for the types of trades/positions you will be involved in?
5. Can you provide a time graph of your earnings, preferably superimposed over btc/usd and other relevant ratios (since you said you are also trading other cryptos)
6. Related to 5, which cryptos will you be trading? I assume btc, ltc. Are there more?
7. A screenshot of the algorithm in action/log file/sample transactions might help convincing (if possible).

Sorry for raining questions on you, your effort is appreciated.
Post
Topic
Board Auctions
Re: Unified ASICMINER orderbook
by
mandelbert
on 14/04/2013, 20:29:05 UTC
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: Ripple Giveaway!
by
mandelbert
on 14/04/2013, 19:54:15 UTC
rwHaVCF9Rhembnk6A5eKhUeezF1jijBVxB