Search content
Sort by

Showing 20 of 1,132 results by rocks
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 16:47:15 UTC
Okay let's try this , I will compile it on my other machine and test it !
Great! Thanks for joining the trial. Make sure you are on the PublicTest branch. We should see your node here:

https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/?q=/SatoshisBitcoinFullFork_PublicTest_At403562:0.11.2/
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 16:45:26 UTC
Very interesting indeed.

I would think that one thing that will potentially hinder the success of your project is the ASIC resistant part. Many bitcoineers have invested thousands (and sometimes millions) of dollars into ASICs that are currently being run and would lose out on their investments if this were to replace Bitcoin, and as a result they probably will not support this project.
Protection for a chain depends on the money that is being spent mining the POW. The hash rate or who specifically mines the chain does not matter, only that enough money is being spent to defer an attacker who would have to spend more money than the current miner set.

Yes, the current ASIC miners cannot mine this chain. That is fine. If the chain has value people will dedicate enough CPU power to the chain to support it. There is lots of idle CPU power at home and in the cloud.

This is also a user-led fork for users who feel the current Bitcoin miners are not moving fast enough to increase the block size limit.

This is an option for users who disagree with the artificial limit and which to participate on a larger block chain. I have already run tests on the main network, and the client successfully mines >1MB blocks and clears the mempool faster than Core....
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 15:59:20 UTC
Someone can compile a windows one for it please?

I have only compiled the Linux version so far.

For the official launch we will release Linux and Windows installation binaries.

The code base is a direct fork of Classic 0.11.2 and has the exact same build environment. If you can compile Classic 0.11.2 for your platform you can make the Satoshi's Bitcoin version too.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 15:51:30 UTC
  • The POW algorithm will changed to re-enable CPU mining

Hahaha, good luck with that.

1) This a modified version of scrypt was created by people with extensive experience porting software algorithms into both ASIC and FPGA implementations. Anything can be done in and ASIC, but the design used provides very little benefit over a lite-weight CPU core, it is likely the most cost efficient implementation will be a very cheap ARM core connected to a stick of DRAM.

2) The algorithm will be modified if/when needed to keep CPU mining. This will be part of the code base on the official launch version of the client. By forcing changes into the POW algorithm if needed, this lowers the benefit of optimizing in the first place since the time frame to gain a benefit is low.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 15:47:51 UTC
Wouldn't this give a massive advantage to exchanges? They will own a huge amount of coins on the new chain but will not be required to pay them out to anybody as they will of course not keep separate user balances.

This provides an alternate path for current Bitcoin users as well. All long-term Bitcoin holders start with their coins on the new branch, that is what makes this project / alt coin different from other alt coins. We have plenty of alt coins with different parameters. What we don't have is an alt coin that preservers the first 7 years of Bitcoin ownership. If you own Bitcoin's you will already own part of Satoshi's Bitcoin after it activates.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 15:44:59 UTC
Not able to sync.

Anyone got some active nodes?

Yes you can see the nodes running on the main net here. The trial fork has not activated yet, after it does the nodes will slowly be rejected from the main P2P network and will partition into a new network.

https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/?q=/SatoshisBitcoinFullFork_PublicTest_At403562:0.11.2/

A new DSNSeeder is used in the modified client to help nodes fine other nodes participating in the fork. If you build the client from the satoshisbitcoin repo everything is automatically setup to use this new DNSSeed.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 15:42:18 UTC
you will change the algo to have more decentralization in mining?
Yes, there is a new POW that should be both ASIC and GPU resistant. A modified version of scrypt was used to overcome the short comings in the Litecoin and others implementations, these modifications 1) greatly increased the memory size used and 2) added a long sequence of random memory accesses which eliminate the effectiveness of pipelining needed to make ASICs efficient.

The code for the new POW and an explanation is here

https://github.com/satoshisbitcoin/satoshisbitcoin/blob/0.11.2_PublicTest_At403562/src/crypto/modified_scrypt_smix.cpp#L193

Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 07:06:41 UTC
Some initial Q&A

you will change the algo to have more decentralization in mining?
Yes, there is a new POW that should be both ASIC and GPU resistant. A modified version of scrypt was used to overcome the short comings in the Litecoin and others implementations, these modifications 1) greatly increased the memory size used and 2) added a long sequence of random memory accesses which eliminate the effectiveness of pipelining needed to make ASICs efficient.

The code for the new POW and an explanation is here

https://github.com/satoshisbitcoin/satoshisbitcoin/blob/0.11.2_PublicTest_At403562/src/crypto/modified_scrypt_smix.cpp#L193



Not able to sync.

Anyone got some active nodes?

Yes you can see the nodes running on the main net here. The trial fork has not activated yet, after it does the nodes will slowly be rejected from the main P2P network and will partition into a new network.

https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/?q=/SatoshisBitcoinFullFork_PublicTest_At403562:0.11.2/

A new DSNSeeder is used in the modified client to help nodes fine other nodes participating in the fork. If you build the client from the satoshisbitcoin repo everything is automatically setup to use this new DNSSeed.



Wouldn't this give a massive advantage to exchanges? They will own a huge amount of coins on the new chain but will not be required to pay them out to anybody as they will of course not keep separate user balances.

This provides an alternate path for current Bitcoin users as well. All long-term Bitcoin holders start with their coins on the new branch, that is what makes this project / alt coin different from other alt coins. We have plenty of alt coins with different parameters. What we don't have is an alt coin that preservers the first 7 years of Bitcoin ownership. If you own Bitcoin's you will already own part of Satoshi's Bitcoin after it activates.



  • The POW algorithm will changed to re-enable CPU mining

Hahaha, good luck with that.

1) This a modified version of scrypt was created by people with extensive experience porting software algorithms into both ASIC and FPGA implementations. Anything can be done in and ASIC, but the design used provides very little benefit over a light-weight CPU core, it is likely the most cost efficient implementation will be a very cheap ARM core connected to a stick of DRAM.

2) The algorithm will be modified if/when needed to keep CPU mining. This will be part of the code base on the official launch version of the client. By forcing changes into the POW algorithm if needed, this lowers the benefit of optimizing in the first place since the time frame to gain a benefit is low. Also we will continue to learn on each iteration and make more and more ASIC/FPGA/GPU-resistant designs. The goal of the project to keep Satoshi's "1 CPU 1 Vote" concept a reality.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Topic OP
[ANN] Bitcoin Full Fork to alternate branch supporting larger blocks
by
rocks
on 20/03/2016, 07:05:28 UTC
We are launching the Satoshi's Bitcoin project to create a full fork branch from Bitcoin with both larger blocks sizes and CPU mining, for Bitcoin uses who prefer to use a version of Bitcoin that scales to larger block sizes and who are tired of waiting.

All development work is complete & several test forks have been successfully completed. The public trial fork is scheduled for this Sunday at around noon eastern time US (block 403562 specifically). The actual launch will follow this test and activate mid-April. This will provide several weeks for anyone who would like to participate in the fork to setup clients.

To participate you only need to compile and start the trial client, everything has been setup to automatically run from there.
  • Download and compile the public test branch “0.11.2_PublicTest_At403562” from github. The build environment is identical to Classic 0.11.2(link below).
  • Backup your datadir, after the fork the datadir may not be compatible with the core client anymore
  • Run bitcoind or bitcoin-qt

The project is a direct fork from Classic 0.11.2 and is on github here:
https://github.com/satoshisbitcoin/satoshisbitcoin/tree/0.11.2_PublicTest_At403562

You can compare all code changes from Classic 0.11.2 here:
https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic/compare/0.11.2...satoshisbitcoin:0.11.2_PublicTest_At403562

There is zero risk to participate and you are able to run a true full node that mines blocks at home again for fun. If the project does not take off there is nothing lost, but if it does you have the chance to mine early adopter blocks. The main thread for the project is here:
https://bitco.in/forum/threads/announcement-bitcoin-project-to-full-fork-to-flexible-blocksizes.933/

This full fork provides an option for Bitcoin users who want to follow Satoshi’s vision of a global peer-to-peer currency that is accessible and usable by everyone. Currently a large number of Bitcoin users want to use a version of Bitcoin that scales as originally intended, but have no option to do. The project is opt-in and only users who want to follow this new branch will do so, users who prefer to stay on the current branch will not be affected.

Why a full fork?

Bitcoin was designed by Satoshi as a global peer-to-peer currency accessible and usable by everyone with instantaneous low cost transactions. This vision was clearly laid out in the Bitcoin white paper, widely understood and agreed by all users and advertised as the vision on the bitcoin.org website and all Bitcoin related forums and websites since 2009.

Despite this clear vision, Bitcoin is now being artificially constrained to low transaction throughputs well below what the Bitcoin network is capable of supporting. User demand has now reached these artificial constrains and many Bitcoin users are no longer able to use the network and are being denied access.

This artificial change is best described by one of the primary early Bitcoin developers since 2010 in the link below. The reasons are complex but revolve around centralized control. A single company who’s business model develops off-chain solutions now controls Bitcoin development and due to electricity cost advantages mining is no longer performed by the broad user community but by a small number of individuals. As a result, despite the fact that a large majority of Bitcoin users clearly want to scale Bitcoin, those who have taken control refuse to do so. https://medium.com/@octskyward/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7

However the strength of Satoshi’s design is users are in control of the system. Any individual user or group of users are able to decide for themselves what Bitcoin should be and which set of rules reflect their preferences. Because of this it is impossible for Bitcoin to ever be centrally controlled, as long as users are able to define for themselves which version of Bitcoin is optimal.

Additionally, it is hoped that this effort will demonstrate how users are in control of Bitcoin and kick-start multiple different full fork options that offer different multiple options for users and the market to choose from, and that the best option will win in time. In doing so Bitcoin benefits from its open nature and will follow user preferences based on market demand.

What is the full fork and what is being changed?

The full fork will change the set of rules that define the block chain on a fixed date. After this date a new branch will be created that follows a set of rules that more closely follow Satoshi’s vision. At this point there will be two separate branches of the blockchain and two separate Bitcoins. One branch will follow the existing rules and a new branch will follow the new rules. Each individual user will be able to decide for themselves which branch to follow. The transaction history and BTC owned will be common on both branches up through the fork date, and after that diverge.

The base client used is Bitcoin Classic version 0.11.2. On top of this version the following rule changes will activate at block height 407232, which is the difficulty adjustment scheduled for mid-April 2016.

  • The block size limit will be removed and replaced with a 2MB limit following Classic, and scale from there
  • The POW algorithm will changed to re-enable CPU mining

I don't want to fork, will this affect me?

No. The fork is fully opt-in and people who do not opt-in will not be effected. To use the fork you have to switch your client from an existing client to the Satoshi's Bitcoin client. Only users who switch clients will follow the fork and use the new branch.

If you continue to use your existing client, you will continue to use the existing blockchain branch and this fork will not affect you in any manner.

Is this client ready?

Yes! Intial coding work is complete and several tests have been performed to demonstrate that the client can run on the main net, fork at a specific height, and start to build a new chain using a new block height and POW. Additional development to create a new seed peer list is needed and described below, but all the core functionality needed has been completed.

Further details are available in the github readme.
https://github.com/satoshisbitcoin/satoshisbitcoin
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
by
rocks
on 18/02/2016, 23:09:23 UTC
O.k.  If we are going to give some kind of meaningful weight to the words of Todd, then even listening to him in the LTB interview, you can also hear him saying that any kind of Hardfork and disagreement is a bad idea to attempt to hardfork with even a few percentage in the minority.

In that regard, even if he is talking about contentiousness in terms of increasing the blocksize limits, he really seems to be asserting the dangers of a hard fork and having people who oppose the hardfork working on the other side of such a hardfork.

So in that regard, even if Todd may be a bit less than artful in the way that he made his claims, he is voicing opposition to a majority forcing some kind of outcome on a minority (thus he is saying something like: "hardforks are dangerous no matter what and we should go through considerable efforts to avoid hardforks, if possible")
What he is really saying is he and Blockstream are blocking a 2MB HF even if everyone else wants one.

They keep saying a HF is bad if a small percentage objects to it.

What they are not saying is they object to it and so the 2MB HF should not happen.

Unfortunately Bitcoin is a democratic system.
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
by
rocks
on 18/02/2016, 23:06:47 UTC
Adam, I think you are 100% correct. But I am big block biased. However, statements speak for themselves.




Samson Mow ‏@Excellion  8h8 hours ago
1/ So to talk about safety @digitsu @olivierjanss, first we need to establish a common understanding. What is the end game?
4 retweets 3 likes
Reply   Retweet  4  
Like 3  
More
 Samson Mow ‏@Excellion  8h8 hours ago
2/ Are we taking about switching to Classic to reach 2MB via HF, and then back to Core after they follow with increase?
4 retweets 4 likes
Reply   Retweet  4  
Like 4  
More
 Samson Mow ‏@Excellion  8h8 hours ago
3/ Or is this a permanent switch to Classic forever whereby we abandon Core?
3 retweets 4 likes
Reply   Retweet  3  
Like 4  
More
 Samson Mow ‏@Excellion  8h8 hours ago
4/ and Core keeps writing code & fixing security issues to give to Classic team so they can merge and change 1 to 2 before re-releasing?
3 retweets 8 likes
Reply   Retweet  3  
Like 8  
More
 Samson Mow ‏@Excellion  8h8 hours ago
5/ If it's the latter, we should ask @petertoddbtc @morcosa @pwuille if they are okay with that arrangement. It's the polite thing to do.
3 retweets 7 likes
Reply   Retweet  3  
Like 7  
More
 Olivier Janssens ‏@olivierjanss  8h8 hours ago
@Excellion 1/ We're not here to replace core but to compete on merits. Our priority/goal is to scale Bitcoin on-chain first.
0 retweets 1 like
Reply   Retweet    
Like 1  
More
 Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc  8h8 hours ago
@olivierjanss @Excellion What's relevant here isn't Bitcoin Core vs Bitcoin Classic, but rather, Bitcoin protocol vs Classic protocol.
3 retweets 7 likes
Reply   Retweet  3  
Like 7  
More
 Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc  8h8 hours ago
@olivierjanss @Excellion Protocol competition is a winner take all, as there can only be one winning protocol w/o screwing up BTC economy.
3 retweets 4 likes
Reply   Retweet  3  
Like 4  
More
 Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc  8h8 hours ago
@olivierjanss @Excellion Alternative is protocol development _cooperation_, where compromises can be made between different parties.
3 retweets 6 likes
Reply   Retweet  3  
Like 6  
More
 Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc  8h8 hours ago
@olivierjanss @Excellion e.g. the Bitcoin Core scaling proposal is a significant compromise in how it uses segwit to increase blocksize.
1 retweet 3 likes
Reply   Retweet  1  
Like 3  
More
 Olivier Janssens ‏@olivierjanss  8h8 hours ago
@petertoddbtc @Excellion Compromise to who? Segwit is something Core proposed. Many people want 2MB HF first.
0 retweets 0 likes
Reply   Retweet    
Like  
More
 Peter Todd ‏@petertoddbtc  8h8 hours ago
@olivierjanss @Excellion Segwit didn't need to be implemented as blocksize increase; using it to increase blocksize was a compromise.
1 retweet 3 likes
Reply   Retweet  1  
Like 3  
More
 User Actions  
Following
 
Peter Todd
‏@petertoddbtc
@olivierjanss @Excellion There's many - including myself - who would prefer to do no increase at all for now. But we must compromise.


My understanding of Todd's position, is that Segwit IS the blocksize increase. /golfclap

The reason Todd and Blockstream want SegWit first is very simple.

LN requires SegWit in order to work, without SegWit LN is broken.

This is why they are pushing SegWit first. They know that if 2MB blocks happen, once everyone sees how easy it was it will become more difficult push SegWit onto the ecosystem. SegWit is a major overhaul and I could see many more miners and nodes dragging their feet on SegWit once they know the next 4MB change is easy too.
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Bitcoin halving how will it affect price?
by
rocks
on 16/02/2016, 04:25:03 UTC
Just look at what happened after the last halving, there was a massive price run.
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Bitcoinocracy: If non-Core hard fork wins, major holders will sell BTC
by
rocks
on 04/02/2016, 04:45:08 UTC
the non-core guy are only implementing somethign really needed not like xt that were adding unecessary crap

You need to learn more. Part of this "New Bitcoin" is democratic vote on any features and limitations of Bitcoin system. Thought New Bitcoin will have 21M coins hard cap? Think again. Their main developer said so much: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4326ya/jonathan_toomim_on_bitcoin_classic_everything_can/

The 21M limit is not fixed because Maxwell is protecting us from changing it, the 21M limit is fixed because the majority of users are incentivized to keep it.

It is the same with the blocksize limit, the majority are incentivized to increase the limit, so it will be increased.

Toomin is stating a basic truth of bitcoin, bitcoin is whatever its users want it to be. And the beautiful thing about bitcoin is no one can stop that
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Bitcoin is EXACTLY where it needs to be right now, what the hell!
by
rocks
on 27/01/2016, 22:32:17 UTC
Recently i had to pay 10% fee to bank to pay smaller amount to a bussiness account, and if that's not a rip-off i dont know what is.
Ofc there are options to have 0 fee with banks, but sometimes you get f*cked.

Overall, bitcoin is perfect for almost anything, and in regards to the fee, i hope there will be a smart solution some time soon, so that we once again
can send coins with 0 fee and get confirms. I just don't think bigger blocks is the right answer to it
Right let's limit bitcoin to the equivalent of 1/4 of a Facebook page load every ten minutes, because 1/2 of a Facebook page load every ten minutes is impossible.

Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
by
rocks
on 23/01/2016, 03:41:16 UTC
poor Austin...

Quote
“I know a number of Blockstream people are frustrated by people who aren’t discussing things with them, talking to other media outlets

 Huh Huh

have you asked theymos what might be the problem?  Just sayin, like.

Hory Sheet.That drop.  Shocked

I am currently serving a 30 day ban on /r/bitcoin

My offence? I replied to Maxwell to counter some ridiculous claims he was making.

Blockstream is not interested in discussing anything with anyone, and openly censors people who do not back them 100%. Cry me a river, they can go pound sand for all I care
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Hard fork and price - beside the panic
by
rocks
on 19/01/2016, 01:59:07 UTC
It will be a huge fricking mess. The market will react badly because the only thing markets want is stability: this situation could be pure destruction or a new beginning.
After Mike's revelation an hard fork now will bring BTC to the floor simply because the market will not understand it. But there can be a recovery only at a price of even more centralization which is something will bring more panic in the community.

To me, this whole thing is just a big mess.
The price will respond positively because the market wants stability. 1MB blocks is an unstable system because no one knows if they will be able to continue using bitcoin or not, and because the economics are completely changed.

The hard fork maintains the current economics and shows users will continue to scale bitcoin as needed. That lowers risk.
Post
Topic
Board Armory
Topic OP
Will Armory support the Bitcoin Classic fork?
by
rocks
on 15/01/2016, 23:52:07 UTC
Title says it all, will the upcoming fork be supported by Armory? Do we need to upgrade? When will the software be available?

Thanks!
Post
Topic
Board Mycelium
Re: Mycelium Bitcoin Wallet
by
rocks
on 15/01/2016, 23:50:19 UTC
Is Mycelium supporting the Bitcoin Classic fork? Because it looks like it is finally going to happen, thankfully.
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
by
rocks
on 10/01/2016, 22:27:58 UTC
Quote
and do that while maintaining the integrity of the system. Not people tinkering with an existing variable that has known tradeoffs if you set it lower or higher.
Because 1MB was not arrived at arbitrarily, but through exhaustive research and testing?
You're not saying that 1MB is simply a meaningless number Satoshi randomly selected because it was always meant to be increased long before it was reached, are you? Because that couldn't be the truth of the situation according to what blockstream says.
Post
Topic
Board Speculation
Re: Is Gavin "The Financial Crisis Is Over" Andresen correct, compromised, or crazy?
by
rocks
on 08/01/2016, 00:09:38 UTC
I have become convinced that iCEBREAKER and tvbcof are shell accounts for either Maxwell or Adam Back.

They both appeared out of nowhere in mid 2014 when blockstream started pushing LN and side chains, and they both have been on a complete, nonstop and full time smear campaign.

You guys are just pathetic