|
quote:I got called by the flash crash.... quote:Oh, so that's what I'm going to do today? I'm going to cry?
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:20 |
|
|
bitpay and coinbase's main services seem to be offering discreet ways to cash out while minimizing the guilt and cognitive dissonance bitcoiners feel for trading in their pogs for things of actual value. they're not "cashing out," they're developing the bitcoin economy and encouraging merchant adoption. it's like going to a gay prostitute and having him reassure you that you're still completely straight so you can go back to being a minister.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
source your quotes
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
OP gets it. The top comment gets it. The rest of the comments... don't The blockchain is now 25GB and I had to move it to a separate harddrive. It's become elitist and expensive to run a Bitcoin node. Who is working to solve this problem? submitted by eCashBV I understand that we can use cloud-hosted blockchain like chain.com or blockcypher.com But it means that increasingly less people are running a bitcoin node on their laptops/computers. And forget about tablets and smartphones. Leaving only professionals with servers. Also, most Bitcoin nodes are run in the USA and Western Europe, because the rest of the world doesn't have the bandwidth to sync 25GB of data. This is killing the 'decentralized' nature of Bitcoin. Imagine if only a rich elite can afford to run the actual Bitcoin node, and everyone else needs to run a cloud-hosted solution. That's a centralized system. In fact, Bitcoin is already geographically centralized, namely in USA and Europe:https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/ Who is working on this problem? Shouldn't there be a dedicated research group actively fixing these problems? Shouldn't companies like Coinbase, Circle and Bitpay each fund a Bitcoin core developer? [-] alphakamp 12 points I dont think is so much a storage problem but a network problem. I wouldnt mind storing even a terabyte but can you imaging downloading that just get started? It took me about a week to download where it is now! | [-] AltoidNerd 5 points | It's not that download that takes so long. It's the signatures. | | | [-] xbtdev 9 points | | Yep, if you want to do it faster, download the bootstrap file via bittorrent first. | | | [-] wk4327 1 point | and also don't mind that cable companies limit monthly traffic to 200-400gig per month, so by the time you get blockchain, quarter of your allowance is used by that alone. | | | [-] BabyFaceMagoo 2 points | | 10% of your allowance. For one month. And you only need to download the blockchain once. | | | | | [-] wk4327 1 point | | | if you straight up download it from a website, yes. But it's not how bitcoin works. Bitcoin client is more like torrent. You download blockchain in small pieces from peers, and you also give your blocks for download to others. | | | | | | You can easily be looking for 100gb/month of traffic if you run full node; in fact there were folks who were tracking their traffic and it was even more. Here's some link: "one of my nodes is there and it's running very good, although with around 100 connections you will eat up that 1 TB traffic limit within a week or two" | | | [-] Amichateur 89 points Wow, 25GB! With Seagate announcing an 8 TB drive, and 1GB blockchain growth per month, it will take >660 years until the harddrive is full. Realy elitist, this blockchain...
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
It's not elitist, it would take a very long time to fill up a hard drive that was announced today
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Why are people complaining about the price swings? I, for one, welcome a return to the good ole days of bitcoin volatility! Goodbye snoozefest, hello rollercoaster! Weeeeeeeeeeee!! (self.Bitcoin) submitted 4 hours ago by iwantathink
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
when you add in that you don't get anything for running a full node other than the satisfaction that you are giving back to the FYGM community in exchange for a decent chunk of disk space and a lot of bandwidth, it's totally worth it.surebet posted:submitted 4 hours ago by iwantathink same
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It's not elitist, it would take a very long time to fill up a hard drive that was announced today the lol part is that OP doesn't realize the blockchain's unlimited growth makes it broken by design but expecting OP to realize things is expecting too much
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
[–]Faithless327Bearish [score hidden] 42 minutes ago The feeling I have is best described as guilt. I feel like I'm letting Bitcoin down, which is so flagrantly irrational that it in-and-of-itself should tell me to stay out for a little while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
I geuss I still don't "get" buttcoins and where they come from? Once they exist, sure then they become just like credits or tokens or pogs or magic cards or something and people are buying and selling them for real USD. Retarded sure but, bitcoin and godspeed What I dont get is how they are intiailly created and that there's a finite amount at some point. so you run a program on your computer that does some math stuff and interacts with other computers that are also doing math stuff, and all of these are beginning with the same raw data. At some point, one of these computers reaches a point where they complete one unit of work or one problem or something(is this a blockchain), and then all of a sudden that computer's account gets 1 bitcoin added to it? and then all the rest of the computers start on the next set of data until somebody "finishes" it and then they get a bitcoin? are these like million piece jigsaw puzzles and the client is just randomly jamming pieces together and eventually someone puts the 1,000,000th piece in and God decides that since you finished the puzzle you get +1, and then the next puzzle is 1,000,001 pieces and then the same thing happens but after 2,1 puzzles are completed we dont have any more puzzles so now you have 2,1 million bitcoins and now theyr'e "Limited Edition" so people pay actual real more dollars to colelct them and trade with their friends? or do i understand this
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Ruby got Railed posted:I geuss I still don't "get" buttcoins and where they come from? Once they exist, sure then they become just like credits or tokens or pogs or magic cards or something and people are buying and selling them for real USD. Retarded sure but, bitcoin and godspeed you sort of have it. bitcoins are created by computers solving math problems. the idea being that you solved this block and got a 50 BTC reward, and then people start solving the next block. you can tell which block a bitcoin originated from and you can verify one block came after another so you know there's no "counterfeit" bitcoins, it's all one chain of supply. everybody agrees that the longest chain is the real Bitcoin, you can fork the chain and create an altcoin or start an entirely new chain but everybody can see that Bitcoin is still the longest original chain, basically. the problems are supposed to be so difficult as to be solved roughly every ten minutes. if blocks are being solved much quicker then one central entity must have too much power and so difficulty increases to encourage decentralized mining, either the person running the better computer gives up and difficulty goes down or its less profitable for everyone bitcoin supply halves every couple of years so as to eventually trickle to nothing. the block reward used to be 50 BTC, now its 25 BTC and sometime in 2016 that will halve again. by the early 2030s 99% of all Bitcoins will have been mined, and it will take another hundred years to mine the last 1%, by which time transaction fees will be enormous so they match the block reward miners are used to receiving and selling in order to pay their bills. that or some bitcoiners believe by the time miners are working for that last 1% they'll be millions of USD each the only reason bitcoins are limited in number is the ridiculous belief that a deflationary currency is a good thing that wouldn't totally wither the economy, its not inherent to a blockchain to have a minimum Robawesome fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
you're not far off. basically, bitcoin is a distributed ledger of transactions. rather than a central authority deciding which transactions are valid, they're validated by consensus of the network. the blockchain is a record of all these transactions, stored on thousands of computers. the software is written in such a way that trying to "lie" about past transactions is basically impossible without a majority share of the network to gain coins (basically, have the value of addresses you control be gifted X number of coins), you solve a math problem that has to be brute forced to solve, but can be easily confirmed. this is done by hashing a bunch of information together, including other transactions that have happened on the network. basically, when I "send" coins from me to you, what we actually do is broadcast to all nodes "ADDRESS X sends Z coins to ADDRESS Y". all the nodes then take these transactions and include them as part of the hash your objective is to pass all your information, plus a random number, into a hash function, until the hash that is generated is less than a number the network has agreed on. this number is lower and lower as the amount of hash power on the network increases in order to keep the rate of reward coins being found to be roughly once every ten minutes (for all people mining everywhere) one of the things included in the hash is the address to send the coins to on a successful problem solution that's the basics, i can explain more if you have any other specific questions
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
haha you did a way better job. explaining bitcoin is hard when youre a bit high
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:that's the basics, i can explain more if you have any other specific questions my only real question is how they seed the random problems that people are solving for i barely understand crypto but from what i heard the whole gimmick is that you have a hash at the end and you feed data into it until you result in a hash that's "close" to what your goal is. difficulty level is just making your end hash even closer to the target hash so what's preventing a computer from storing a bunch of known input-hash results like a rainbow table (is that what a rainbow table is? idk) and then saying "hmm gently caress they're looking for hash XXXXXXXXXXX and I have XXXZXXYYXXY why not just feed that problem in and see if it works"? or is that what they're doing? or do they re-roll the crypto process? gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Robawesome posted:haha you did a way better job. explaining bitcoin is hard when youre a bit high there's a reason i get really mad when people say "people who make fun of bitcoin don't understand it" because I understand the hell out of it, and I know enough to be honestly impressed that Satoshi built something that functions AT ALL, from a algorithmic standpoint it's super good however, if someone made a cannon that shot pigeons directly into my crotch while keeping the pigeons completely free from harm, I'd be honestly super impressed at their engineering skill and how they managed to integrate that with their understanding of targeting systems and ornithology, but I'd still consider the machine to not be accomplishing anything of value
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:so what's preventing a computer from storing a bunch of known input-hash results like a rainbow table (is that what a rainbow table is? idk) and then saying "hmm gently caress they're looking for hash XXXXXXXXXXX and I have XXXZXXYYXXY why not just feed that problem in and see if it works"? or is that what they're doing? or do they re-roll the crypto process? gently caress. and since a good hash function completely changes if you change any part of it, you could get a good enough result previously with all the other information (your address and a blank transaction list) but add in another variable and all the pre-work you've done is worthless like I said, Satoshi thought the algorithm out really, really well. he just doesn't understand anything about economics past "things only have value because we say they do" and he never actually dealt with the problem of the size of the blockchain theflyingorc fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:i believe one of the inputs you have to use for the current block is the hash of the previous block, which you don't know until after it's solved huh, that is clever then. that's a hell of a way to prevent rainbow-tabling. question from there, though - how does the network "know" that you solved the puzzle? your client broadcasts "hey everyone, the answer is [Hash]&[Other poo poo] and then the network chews on it for a few minutes with all clients saying "huh, yup, you're right" and then it's confirmed? i'm just wondering what's preventing a malicious client design from yelling "BINGO" every 15 milliseconds like a senile old person at a bingo tournament and clogging up the network with bullshit claims
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
alright so really that puzzle analogy isnt far off, at least as the "how" from the end-miners perspective. do hard thing. get paid. is satoshi jsut some weird wizard that created this and wait gently caress this buttcoin
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:huh, that is clever then. that's a hell of a way to prevent rainbow-tabling. question from there, though - how does the network "know" that you solved the puzzle? your client broadcasts "hey everyone, the answer is [Hash]&[Other poo poo] and then the network chews on it for a few minutes with all clients saying "huh, yup, you're right" and then it's confirmed? bullshit claims aren't passed on by clients; blocks must be valid to be passed around even a single hop. if someone connected to 100 machines and spammed thousands of invalid results, they would never make it past those 100 machines.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
[–]noSlave[S] 6 points 20 hours ago ....my problem was that the money I made was with daytrading (btw. startmoney with holding altcoins). But I have stoped daytrading and doing some other stuff while still using leverage for longterm. Bad idea, very bad idea. ....and daytrading was such easy but totally killed my time and even start killing my live. Now I have all my time back, but beeing broken . But what does ppl say: Everytime you fall and you'll be able to stand up after, you will be stronger. Hopefully they are right. At the moment I just feel very sad. Sad about me to beeing a greedy. Sad about the lost money. The money I want to use it to build some (social) projects. The money I lost I even don't need for me. I'm living mostly without money, except the healthcare. How is it possible? It very easy if you're homeless. . (no not really homeless. Just having no apartment. I'm at home where I am :-)) ....back to trading. (sry for all the text above. .....I'm just a bit emotional right now, so...) Leverage is a high risky game if you gamble (like I have done after I stoped daytrading) If you have the time to do so you maybe should thinking about giving it a try. With the correct bankroll managment, stop-loss order (but you should use a scrypt for that. The normal stop-losses are market order....not a good idea.) Ah, and yes I saw your post ;-). Nice to hear you decide right! :-).
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
my impression is that yeah, when you broadcast a new block, other miners look at it, check it, and say, "yeah, that works," and start working from the new block. that's what can cause a hard fork, where the mining software gets updated and the parameters of a good block change, meaning that miners on the old software reject hashes from the new software. this has happened (which effectively created a situation where nobody could spend bitcoin and be sure it'd make it across the network and miners were told to shut down their rigs until the devs figured the situation out. sound currency). part of how hashes work is that they're meant to be inexpensive enough, computationally, to run once for verification, but very expensive when you try to run many at once. that makes it hard to brute force a solution to a hash because you can only try so many at once. meanwhile, if you have a single hash and know the solution (say you're logging into a website), you feed the server your password, and near-instantly the server runs a hash, verifies you have the right password, and lets you in. and just to be clear, any good hash algorithm should have no way of predicting what a solution would look like. if you can solve a hash quicker than brute forcing it, it's a bad algorithm that should be replaced.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:i'm just wondering what's preventing a malicious client design from yelling "BINGO" every 15 milliseconds like a senile old person at a bingo tournament and clogging up the network with bullshit claims If you get 51% of the network you can start "rainbow tabling" to a small extent (actually not that at all, but shutup). The network always accepts the longest valid block, so imagine this scenario: two miners solve a block at the same time, and broadcast to their peers "i have solved this" each peer takes the first block of length CURLENGTH that they receive This results in block A(and therefore, miner A getting the rewards) being the correct block by 60% of the network, and block B (and therefore, miner B getting the rewards) being the correct block by 40% of the network now, you'd expect this means that block A will be part of the definitive chain. however, one of the nodes that accept block B gets incredibly lucky, and happens to find a new solution after just one minute of accepting block B. So it announces "i found block C, which is built from B!" to the rest of the network this block has no competition, so it fully propagates to everyone, and they all accept it. you can then see the problem - block A no longer exists. if miner A spent his coins during that minute, the person he sent them to will find that they were never his to send, and that person therefore might have already given him his bagel and he left the store. this is why you wait for multiple "confirmations". collisions are FAIRLY rare, and multiple collisions in a row are QUITE rare, but they do happen, and any transactions only contained in orphaned blocks are just gone now (the standard wait to be TOTALLY SURE is 6 confirmations, because 6 in a row is so unlikely as to be basically impossible). now, back to the 51% attack - I have over half the hashing power on the network (I'm Ghash.io on certain days, apparently). I mine a block with a valid solution (Block D). instead of publishing that to everyone, i keep that info to myself and start working on the next block. Someone else finds a solution and broadcasts block E. However, since I have over 50% of the hashing power, I know that it is likely I will find block F(using block D) before anyone finds their own block, so I churn away and publish block F(which points to D), effectively wiping E from existence. I also KNOW I can do this, so I can buy things with bitcoin, not include the transaction with block D, let it be published in E, and then overwrite E so it never happened, meaning I still have the coins you thought you had
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:huh, that is clever then. that's a hell of a way to prevent rainbow-tabling. question from there, though - how does the network "know" that you solved the puzzle? your client broadcasts "hey everyone, the answer is [Hash]&[Other poo poo] and then the network chews on it for a few minutes with all clients saying "huh, yup, you're right" and then it's confirmed? pretty much. the client that produced a hash < difficulty sends out a note, "hey the seed for block x is y, you should totally try it out" and everyone else goes, "hey, he's right, did you hear? the seed for block x is y, you should totally try it out" and so on and so on. If you lie about solving the seed, your info silently gets dropped and doesn't propagate through the net. Since verifying a hash only takes a billionth of a second now, you're hard pressed cloggin up the net. (Though this has been done some years ago during an experiment by strategically clogging up connections to ensure only solutions from a predetermined source came through)
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Sad about me to beeing a greedy
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:there's a reason i get really mad when people say "people who make fun of bitcoin don't understand it" because I understand the hell out of it, and I know enough to be honestly impressed that Satoshi built something that functions AT ALL, from a algorithmic standpoint it's super good agreed. its basically black & white for bitcoiners, you either evangelize for and "get" bitcoin or you must not understand it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:rotor, please do what must be done iawtp
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:there's not a lot of benefit to doing it, eventually they'd probably just discard any packet coming from you, and like I said - verification is quick (you hash one function and see if it is a solution, instead of churning through billions of them) huh, i knew of that stuff in theory but never knew how it worked. honestly if bitcoin is the work of one guy it's still p. impressive despite some glaring flaws, like you said sorry to make you effortpost you can call me a shitlord now and tell me to get out
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:sorry to make your effortpost you can call me a shitlord now and tell me to get out iawtp
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
Robawesome posted:agreed. its basically black & white for bitcoiners, you either evangelize for and "get" bitcoin or you must not understand it. well that bitcoin independence video also had something on people who "understand bitcoin but ｆｅａｒ it".
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:there's a reason i get really mad when people say "people who make fun of bitcoin don't understand it" because I understand the hell out of it, and I know enough to be honestly impressed that Satoshi built something that functions AT ALL, from a algorithmic standpoint it's super good i will found an exchange where people can trade worthless fiat for these incredible cannons that will free us from the shackles of government and enable a true free market
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Dren posted:i will found an exchange where people can trade worthless fiat for these incredible cannons that will free us from the shackles of government and enable a true free market i understand this technology, but I fear for my ability to control my crotch if it ever becomes mainstream
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:i understand this technology, but I fear for my ability to control my crotch if it ever becomes mainstream to the moon!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
Pigeon crotch cannon is sovereignty. Pigeon crotch cannon is renaissance. Pigeon crotch cannon is ours. Pigeon crotch cannon is.
Linguica fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:sorry to make you effortpost you can call me a shitlord now and tell me to get out and yeah, the way the protocol is setup is really cool and the only glaring flaw in the protocol is the same problem with any distributed file - everybody having to keep a copy of the thing is nuts, and in turn creates the 7-per-second transaction limit (which can't be increased without also exponentially increasing the rate the blockchain grows) all the other problems with bitcoin are what the machine does, not how it's built - the biggest of these is that it is inherently deflationary which is dumb as hell, it's literally the only part of the system where I think Satoshi was actively stupid also, they're only backed by the madness of libertarians, so I'd like better backing, too the lack of chargebacks is a completely unacceptable flaw and also intrinsically necessary for a distributed system afaik, I can't imagine a scenario where you could fix it without creating a central authority. if someone invented a version of bitcoin where you could somehow do chargebacks i'd honestly think you had a workable payment method but I suspect it's impossible the fact that you can't confirm ownership of an address except by demonstrating that you can move money from it is super dumb. there's also no way to prove that you have LOST ownership, which is why we don't know whether or not Satoshi will just sell his million coins someday ...I'm actually not sure if there are any other "flaws" with Bitcoin. so I can only think of 5 base issues, 2 of which could probably be fixed (deflationary and ownership), and 3 of which are showstopping root problems with the very idea of BTC
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
idgi if bitpay just sells it's bitcoins immediately and the overstock numbers are right, why isn't the price lower than it is right now is it possible that yospos is wrong about how fragile this "bubble" is?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
did anyone just feel a chilly breeze?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
My Linux Rig posted:idgi if bitpay just sells it's bitcoins immediately and the overstock numbers are right, why isn't the price lower than it is right now otherwise, since they just announced they process for free, they have 0 dollars worth of inputs as far as I can tell? the only way they can possibly expect to make money is from selling bitcoin in the future edit: we can talk with him now since we all died at the end of the last thread
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
stay safe bitcoin stymie
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
BeOSPOS posted:did anyone just feel a chilly breeze? but when i looked there was nothing there
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:20 |
|
|
theflyingorc posted:the lack of chargebacks is a completely unacceptable flaw and also intrinsically necessary for a distributed system afaik, I can't imagine a scenario where you could fix it without creating a central authority. if someone invented a version of bitcoin where you could somehow do chargebacks i'd honestly think you had a workable payment method but I suspect it's impossible theflyingorc posted:the fact that you can't confirm ownership of an address except by demonstrating that you can move money from it is super dumb. there's also no way to prove that you have LOST ownership, which is why we don't know whether or not Satoshi will just sell his million coins someday
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 19:00
|
|