Search content
Sort by

Showing 20 of 206 results by wtogami
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched!
by
wtogami
on 10/09/2015, 13:38:49 UTC
Code:
    "vout": [
        {
            "value": [b]0.00020000,[/b]

I used the latest QT Litecoin Core version v0.10.2.2 (64-bit)

I guess my question is how did this tx get accepted locally (and in other nodes) if it has insufficient fees to be confirmed? And why isnt 0.001 enough of a fee? Are you saying that if the output was bigger, the fee would have been enough?

James

https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/72707115a7d968674866a1ddfc45348c4cb3e712
Litecoin: Anti-spam mechanism adds 1000 bytes to the fee for each output smaller than DUST_THRESHOLD

Litecoin's stock policy has had this fee penalty for each too small output since 2011.  Your code must calculate fees in the same manner or it will fail to relay or be mined by nodes operating under the stock policy.  Nothing stops submitting a raw transaction to your own node, and some explorers accept non-standard transactions such as this, but the vast majority of the network will not accept it.  You can test this by watching debug.log of any standard node.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched!
by
wtogami
on 10/09/2015, 03:10:32 UTC
Code:
2015-09-07 16:23:58 ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool : not enough fees 3b90916d8442342813c4b6415f699cdd2846f668881c7ce8f5966a16a3bf47f3, 100000 < 200000

It is not propagating because it has insufficient fees.  There is no bug here.

Can you dumprawtransaction and paste the output here?  If you do I can explain why the fees are insufficient.  I'm guessing it has an output that is too small and thus triggering the fee penalty?  BTW, what client created this transaction?
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: So Core is clearly wining the XT vote - BUT what are the Core devs doing?
by
wtogami
on 22/08/2015, 07:43:13 UTC
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes (c)
by
wtogami
on 16/08/2015, 07:44:31 UTC
The whole appeal to authority hugely undermines the principles of the system.  If you want something that lives and dies on the whim of some authority: centeralized systems can have much better performance and security properties.

This is a critically important point.
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: Public statements from large mining farms regarding block size limits.
by
wtogami
on 15/08/2015, 21:35:59 UTC
Gavin is the one doing lobbying on big businesses, including miners. I have not heard that Blockstream have been doing any lobbying so far, but hopefully they will soon to bring some balance to the lobbying done by Gavin, Mike & co.

Would you prefer political lobbying, or a science and engineering based approach to improve Bitcoin to make it safer to increase the block size in the future?
Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Wiki
Re: Proposal: ads on the wiki
by
wtogami
on 02/06/2015, 07:48:30 UTC
theymos forgot to mention that most of the cost of the wiki (aside from the hosting and DDoS protection) is the upstream mediawiki developer we hired to make it suck a lot less.  He has a lot of work ahead of him including ...

  • Keep the wiki updated, secure and with the latest features.
  • Rewrite the cryptopayment plugin so it is suitable for open source, allowing anyone else to deploy it.
  • Currently the non-English wikis are almost dead partly because of the terrible centralauth system, and the fact that each language is effectively another wiki, making it impossible to keep translations in line.  He will deploy the mediawiki Translate plugin, then convert all of the non-English wikis to use the same login system.
  • Time consuming task of reaching out to the many non-English communities and teaching them how the wiki no longer sucks with the translate plugin.  They need to work on translating each page, one paragraph at a time.

Post
Topic
Board Meta
Re: What is happened to the forum?
by
wtogami
on 02/04/2015, 13:36:50 UTC
The forum was under a big DDoS attack.  theymos has long resisted the idea of protecting the forum with the most cost effective DDoS protection providers like Cloudflare because doing so hands the SSL private keys to a 3rd party company and increases the privacy risk of the users.  Instead he decided to try hosting at another provider with automatic DDoS mitigation where theymos continues to directly control the SSL certificate.  This provider is considerably more expensive than Cloudflare, which he considers necessary to protect the users.  It remains to be seen if their service is reliable and worth the cost.
Post
Topic
Board Meta
Re: Bitcointalk down
by
wtogami
on 02/04/2015, 13:30:03 UTC
The forum was under a big DDoS attack.  theymos has long resisted the idea of protecting the forum with the most cost effective DDoS protection providers like Cloudflare because doing so hands the SSL private keys to a 3rd party company and increases the privacy risk of the users.  Instead he decided to try hosting at another provider with automatic DDoS mitigation where theymos continues to directly control the SSL certificate.  He will see how things go with this new host provider.
Post
Topic
Board Meta
Re: Bitcointalk no longer at 109.201.133.195 bitcointalk.org ?
by
wtogami
on 02/04/2015, 13:27:07 UTC
The forum was under a big DDoS attack.  theymos has long resisted the idea of protecting the forum with the most cost effective DDoS protection providers like Cloudflare because doing so hands the SSL private keys to a 3rd party company and increases the privacy risk of the users.  Instead he decided to try hosting at another provider with automatic DDoS mitigation where theymos continues to directly control the SSL certificate.  He will see how things go with this new host provider.
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: Bitcoin OMG! including Watch-Only
by
wtogami
on 13/11/2014, 10:28:54 UTC
Bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG30
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg/commits/OMG-0.9
http://download1.rpmfusion.org/~warren/bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG30/
Please use GPG to verify the integrity of each download.

Major update!
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: Bitcoin OMG! including Watch-Only
by
wtogami
on 03/10/2014, 01:11:54 UTC
Bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG27
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg/commits/0.9.3-OMG27
http://download1.rpmfusion.org/~warren/bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG27/linux/
Please use GPG to verify the integrity of each download.

These builds are not well tested.  Please report any problems in a Github ticket.
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: Bitcoin OMG! including Watch-Only
by
wtogami
on 01/10/2014, 19:24:48 UTC
Update Oct 1st, 2014:
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg
0.9.3 plus many backports including watch-only.  Can you help to test especially the watch-only parts?
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: litecoin wallet fees (kind of wierd, kind of high)
by
wtogami
on 02/06/2014, 01:55:13 UTC
How is it bad?  The fee is roughly 1 cent for most transactions now.
Post
Topic
Board New forum software
Re: Notification when you are quoted?
by
wtogami
on 24/05/2014, 09:49:56 UTC
They plan on allowing you to trim down the previous quote to whatever lines you want.  Since previous quotes are by reference I assume clicking through to the post or expanding it will also be possible.  It's in the design phase now.
Post
Topic
Board New forum software
Re: Notification when you are quoted?
by
wtogami
on 24/05/2014, 07:39:34 UTC
The new forum software is already planning to do quote replies by reference (post, version and line number) instead of by pasting duplicate blobs of text, so notifications upon replies is very much possible.
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
MacOS X Deterministic Nightly Builds Now Available
by
wtogami
on 22/05/2014, 01:11:31 UTC
Status Update
Thanks to Cory Fields gitian deterministic builds for MacOS X are now an official part of the Bitcoin Core release process.  These nightly builds now provide deterministic builds for Linux, Windows and MacOS X.  Great work Cory Fields!
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: Bitcoin Core Nightly Builds - Testers Needed
by
wtogami
on 13/05/2014, 21:55:02 UTC
Status Update

http://nightly.bitcoin.it now has separate builds for the master and 0.9.2 branch.  0.9.2 is what will soon become the release while master is accepting changes that may not be safe for a near-term release.

The release candidate for 0.9.2 was previously scheduled for May 13th.  Yesterday it was decided to postpone this for 7 days due to the Bitcoin 2014 Amsterdam conference.  The string freeze is now in effect and it is a very good time to contribute translations during these next 7 days.
Post
Topic
Board Meta
Re: How to give multiple people rights to edit an ANN post
by
wtogami
on 12/05/2014, 22:12:28 UTC
Please request the feature in the new forum software section.
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: Bitcoin Core Nightly Builds - Testers Needed
by
wtogami
on 11/05/2014, 07:35:01 UTC
We are only two days away from the scheduled 0.9.2 release candidate.  Now is a very good time to fix the translations.
Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: Translators Needed for Bitcoin Core
by
wtogami
on 11/05/2014, 00:59:00 UTC
https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/bitcoin/
We are approaching the deadline for Bitcoin Core 0.9.2.  Many languages require translations.  You can help even if you do not speak those languages by bringing attention to this thread of the native language communities.  Can you help?