Blockchain Unconfirmed transaction Hack,100% working ...

Technical: Taproot: Why Activate?

This is a follow-up on https://old.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/hqzp14/technical_the_path_to_taproot_activation/
Taproot! Everybody wants it!! But... you might ask yourself: sure, everybody else wants it, but why would I, sovereign Bitcoin HODLer, want it? Surely I can be better than everybody else because I swapped XXX fiat for Bitcoin unlike all those nocoiners?
And it is important for you to know the reasons why you, o sovereign Bitcoiner, would want Taproot activated. After all, your nodes (or the nodes your wallets use, which if you are SPV, you hopefully can pester to your wallet vendoimplementor about) need to be upgraded in order for Taproot activation to actually succeed instead of becoming a hot sticky mess.
First, let's consider some principles of Bitcoin.
I'm sure most of us here would agree that the above are very important principles of Bitcoin and that these are principles we would not be willing to remove. If anything, we would want those principles strengthened (especially the last one, financial privacy, which current Bitcoin is only sporadically strong with: you can get privacy, it just requires effort to do so).
So, how does Taproot affect those principles?

Taproot and Your /Coins

Most HODLers probably HODL their coins in singlesig addresses. Sadly, switching to Taproot would do very little for you (it gives a mild discount at spend time, at the cost of a mild increase in fee at receive time (paid by whoever sends to you, so if it's a self-send from a P2PKH or bech32 address, you pay for this); mostly a wash).
(technical details: a Taproot output is 1 version byte + 32 byte public key, while a P2WPKH (bech32 singlesig) output is 1 version byte + 20 byte public key hash, so the Taproot output spends 12 bytes more; spending from a P2WPKH requires revealing a 32-byte public key later, which is not needed with Taproot, and Taproot signatures are about 9 bytes smaller than P2WPKH signatures, but the 32 bytes plus 9 bytes is divided by 4 because of the witness discount, so it saves about 11 bytes; mostly a wash, it increases blockweight by about 1 virtual byte, 4 weight for each Taproot-output-input, compared to P2WPKH-output-input).
However, as your HODLings grow in value, you might start wondering if multisignature k-of-n setups might be better for the security of your savings. And it is in multisignature that Taproot starts to give benefits!
Taproot switches to using Schnorr signing scheme. Schnorr makes key aggregation -- constructing a single public key from multiple public keys -- almost as trivial as adding numbers together. "Almost" because it involves some fairly advanced math instead of simple boring number adding, but hey when was the last time you added up your grocery list prices by hand huh?
With current P2SH and P2WSH multisignature schemes, if you have a 2-of-3 setup, then to spend, you need to provide two different signatures from two different public keys. With Taproot, you can create, using special moon math, a single public key that represents your 2-of-3 setup. Then you just put two of your devices together, have them communicate to each other (this can be done airgapped, in theory, by sending QR codes: the software to do this is not even being built yet, but that's because Taproot hasn't activated yet!), and they will make a single signature to authorize any spend from your 2-of-3 address. That's 73 witness bytes -- 18.25 virtual bytes -- of signatures you save!
And if you decide that your current setup with 1-of-1 P2PKH / P2WPKH addresses is just fine as-is: well, that's the whole point of a softfork: backwards-compatibility; you can receive from Taproot users just fine, and once your wallet is updated for Taproot-sending support, you can send to Taproot users just fine as well!
(P2WPKH and P2WSH -- SegWit v0 -- addresses start with bc1q; Taproot -- SegWit v1 --- addresses start with bc1p, in case you wanted to know the difference; in bech32 q is 0, p is 1)
Now how about HODLers who keep all, or some, of their coins on custodial services? Well, any custodial service worth its salt would be doing at least 2-of-3, or probably something even bigger, like 11-of-15. So your custodial service, if it switched to using Taproot internally, could save a lot more (imagine an 11-of-15 getting reduced from 11 signatures to just 1!), which --- we can only hope! --- should translate to lower fees and better customer service from your custodial service!
So I think we can say, very accurately, that the Bitcoin principle --- that YOU are in control of your money --- can only be helped by Taproot (if you are doing multisignature), and, because P2PKH and P2WPKH remain validly-usable addresses in a Taproot future, will not be harmed by Taproot. Its benefit to this principle might be small (it mostly only benefits multisignature users) but since it has no drawbacks with this (i.e. singlesig users can continue to use P2WPKH and P2PKH still) this is still a nice, tidy win!
(even singlesig users get a minor benefit, in that multisig users will now reduce their blockchain space footprint, so that fees can be kept low for everybody; so for example even if you have your single set of private keys engraved on titanium plates sealed in an airtight box stored in a safe buried in a desert protected by angry nomads riding giant sandworms because you're the frickin' Kwisatz Haderach, you still gain some benefit from Taproot)
And here's the important part: if P2PKH/P2WPKH is working perfectly fine with you and you decide to never use Taproot yourself, Taproot will not affect you detrimentally. First do no harm!

Taproot and Your Contracts

No one is an island, no one lives alone. Give and you shall receive. You know: by trading with other people, you can gain expertise in some obscure little necessity of the world (and greatly increase your productivity in that little field), and then trade the products of your expertise for necessities other people have created, all of you thereby gaining gains from trade.
So, contracts, which are basically enforceable agreements that facilitate trading with people who you do not personally know and therefore might not trust.
Let's start with a simple example. You want to buy some gewgaws from somebody. But you don't know them personally. The seller wants the money, you want their gewgaws, but because of the lack of trust (you don't know them!! what if they're scammers??) neither of you can benefit from gains from trade.
However, suppose both of you know of some entity that both of you trust. That entity can act as a trusted escrow. The entity provides you security: this enables the trade, allowing both of you to get gains from trade.
In Bitcoin-land, this can be implemented as a 2-of-3 multisignature. The three signatories in the multisgnature would be you, the gewgaw seller, and the escrow. You put the payment for the gewgaws into this 2-of-3 multisignature address.
Now, suppose it turns out neither of you are scammers (whaaaat!). You receive the gewgaws just fine and you're willing to pay up for them. Then you and the gewgaw seller just sign a transaction --- you and the gewgaw seller are 2, sufficient to trigger the 2-of-3 --- that spends from the 2-of-3 address to a singlesig the gewgaw seller wants (or whatever address the gewgaw seller wants).
But suppose some problem arises. The seller gave you gawgews instead of gewgaws. Or you decided to keep the gewgaws but not sign the transaction to release the funds to the seller. In either case, the escrow is notified, and if it can sign with you to refund the funds back to you (if the seller was a scammer) or it can sign with the seller to forward the funds to the seller (if you were a scammer).
Taproot helps with this: like mentioned above, it allows multisignature setups to produce only one signature, reducing blockchain space usage, and thus making contracts --- which require multiple people, by definition, you don't make contracts with yourself --- is made cheaper (which we hope enables more of these setups to happen for more gains from trade for everyone, also, moon and lambos).
(technology-wise, it's easier to make an n-of-n than a k-of-n, making a k-of-n would require a complex setup involving a long ritual with many communication rounds between the n participants, but an n-of-n can be done trivially with some moon math. You can, however, make what is effectively a 2-of-3 by using a three-branch SCRIPT: either 2-of-2 of you and seller, OR 2-of-2 of you and escrow, OR 2-of-2 of escrow and seller. Fortunately, Taproot adds a facility to embed a SCRIPT inside a public key, so you can have a 2-of-2 Taprooted address (between you and seller) with a SCRIPT branch that can instead be spent with 2-of-2 (you + escrow) OR 2-of-2 (seller + escrow), which implements the three-branched SCRIPT above. If neither of you are scammers (hopefully the common case) then you both sign using your keys and never have to contact the escrow, since you are just using the escrow public key without coordinating with them (because n-of-n is trivial but k-of-n requires setup with communication rounds), so in the "best case" where both of you are honest traders, you also get a privacy boost, in that the escrow never learns you have been trading on gewgaws, I mean ewww, gawgews are much better than gewgaws and therefore I now judge you for being a gewgaw enthusiast, you filthy gewgawer).

Taproot and Your Contracts, Part 2: Cryptographic Boogaloo

Now suppose you want to buy some data instead of things. For example, maybe you have some closed-source software in trial mode installed, and want to pay the developer for the full version. You want to pay for an activation code.
This can be done, today, by using an HTLC. The developer tells you the hash of the activation code. You pay to an HTLC, paying out to the developer if it reveals the preimage (the activation code), or refunding the money back to you after a pre-agreed timeout. If the developer claims the funds, it has to reveal the preimage, which is the activation code, and you can now activate your software. If the developer does not claim the funds by the timeout, you get refunded.
And you can do that, with HTLCs, today.
Of course, HTLCs do have problems:
Fortunately, with Schnorr (which is enabled by Taproot), we can now use the Scriptless Script constuction by Andrew Poelstra. This Scriptless Script allows a new construction, the PTLC or Pointlocked Timelocked Contract. Instead of hashes and preimages, just replace "hash" with "point" and "preimage" with "scalar".
Or as you might know them: "point" is really "public key" and "scalar" is really a "private key". What a PTLC does is that, given a particular public key, the pointlocked branch can be spent only if the spender reveals the private key of the given public key to you.
Another nice thing with PTLCs is that they are deniable. What appears onchain is just a single 2-of-2 signature between you and the developemanufacturer. It's like a magic trick. This signature has no special watermarks, it's a perfectly normal signature (the pledge). However, from this signature, plus some datta given to you by the developemanufacturer (known as the adaptor signature) you can derive the private key of a particular public key you both agree on (the turn). Anyone scraping the blockchain will just see signatures that look just like every other signature, and as long as nobody manages to hack you and get a copy of the adaptor signature or the private key, they cannot get the private key behind the public key (point) that the pointlocked branch needs (the prestige).
(Just to be clear, the public key you are getting the private key from, is distinct from the public key that the developemanufacturer will use for its funds. The activation key is different from the developer's onchain Bitcoin key, and it is the activation key whose private key you will be learning, not the developer's/manufacturer's onchain Bitcoin key).
So:
Taproot lets PTLCs exist onchain because they enable Schnorr, which is a requirement of PTLCs / Scriptless Script.
(technology-wise, take note that Scriptless Script works only for the "pointlocked" branch of the contract; you need normal Script, or a pre-signed nLockTimed transaction, for the "timelocked" branch. Since Taproot can embed a script, you can have the Taproot pubkey be a 2-of-2 to implement the Scriptless Script "pointlocked" branch, then have a hidden script that lets you recover the funds with an OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY after the timeout if the seller does not claim the funds.)

Quantum Quibbles!

Now if you were really paying attention, you might have noticed this parenthetical:
(technical details: a Taproot output is 1 version byte + 32 byte public key, while a P2WPKH (bech32 singlesig) output is 1 version byte + 20 byte public key hash...)
So wait, Taproot uses raw 32-byte public keys, and not public key hashes? Isn't that more quantum-vulnerable??
Well, in theory yes. In practice, they probably are not.
It's not that hashes can be broken by quantum computes --- they're still not. Instead, you have to look at how you spend from a P2WPKH/P2PKH pay-to-public-key-hash.
When you spend from a P2PKH / P2WPKH, you have to reveal the public key. Then Bitcoin hashes it and checks if this matches with the public-key-hash, and only then actually validates the signature for that public key.
So an unconfirmed transaction, floating in the mempools of nodes globally, will show, in plain sight for everyone to see, your public key.
(public keys should be public, that's why they're called public keys, LOL)
And if quantum computers are fast enough to be of concern, then they are probably fast enough that, in the several minutes to several hours from broadcast to confirmation, they have already cracked the public key that is openly broadcast with your transaction. The owner of the quantum computer can now replace your unconfirmed transaction with one that pays the funds to itself. Even if you did not opt-in RBF, miners are still incentivized to support RBF on RBF-disabled transactions.
So the extra hash is not as significant a protection against quantum computers as you might think. Instead, the extra hash-and-compare needed is just extra validation effort.
Further, if you have ever, in the past, spent from the address, then there exists already a transaction indelibly stored on the blockchain, openly displaying the public key from which quantum computers can derive the private key. So those are still vulnerable to quantum computers.
For the most part, the cryptographers behind Taproot (and Bitcoin Core) are of the opinion that quantum computers capable of cracking Bitcoin pubkeys are unlikely to appear within a decade or two.
So:
For now, the homomorphic and linear properties of elliptic curve cryptography provide a lot of benefits --- particularly the linearity property is what enables Scriptless Script and simple multisignature (i.e. multisignatures that are just 1 signature onchain). So it might be a good idea to take advantage of them now while we are still fairly safe against quantum computers. It seems likely that quantum-safe signature schemes are nonlinear (thus losing these advantages).

Summary

I Wanna Be The Taprooter!

So, do you want to help activate Taproot? Here's what you, mister sovereign Bitcoin HODLer, can do!

But I Hate Taproot!!

That's fine!

Discussions About Taproot Activation

submitted by almkglor to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

What is Bitcoin Cash and some exchanges to try out!

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) came about in August 2017 after a hard fork and a split in the Bitcoin blockchain. Bitcoin Cash is a direct result of the constant debates and many opinions about the future of Bitcoin’s scalability and mass adoption.

Bitcoin vs. Bitcoin Cash

Bitcoin’s blockchain has grown exponentially in recent times. This means that many more users are using the cryptocurrency, which is slowing down the network.
The limited Bitcoin block size of 1 MB means that blocks are filling up quickly, resulting in a long queue of unconfirmed transactions. As a result, at peak times, transactions have become slow and expensive.
Bitcoin cash, on the other hand, was initially created with an 8MB block, which was later on increased in size to 32MB. This change allows for more transactions to be processed in each block mined.
Many see this as a step forward in terms of how best to scale the network.
Bitcoin Cash opposers remain adamant that it’s simply a short-term fix that doesn’t solve the problem in the long run. Also, they claim there’s no implementation of ideas such as Segwit to help effectively break transactions down into smaller, more manageable pieces.
Bitcoin Cash (BCH), Sometimes referred to as Bcash, is a fork of Bitcoin (BTC). When a fork occurs on a Blockchain, the currency is basically duplicated.
This means that anyone with Bitcoins in his possession at the time the fork occurred, got credited with the same amount of Bitcoin Cash.

Buying Bitcoin Cash in 3 Simple Steps

Step 1: Get a Bitcoin Cash Wallet

Before you can buy Bitcoin Cash, you’ll need a Bitcoin Cash wallet to store it in. Hardware wallets that support Bitcoin Cash include industry leaders Ledger and TREZOR.
Both Ledger and TREZOR provide functions for you to use Bitcoin Cash as you would any other cryptocurrency. Both have also introduced the ability to claim your funds if you already owned Bitcoin at the time of the Bitcoin Cash hard fork.
Additionally, there are a variety of software wallets you can use to store Bitcoin Cash as well.
Exodus provides a great user experience with a seamless coin exchange service known as Shapeshift built in.
Edge is a mobile wallet for iOS and Android that supports multiple cryptocurrencies including Bitcoin Cash. It also has a variety of features allowing you to buy cryptocurrencies and exchange them from within the app.
Electron Cash is a clone of the awesome Electrum wallet for Bitcoin. If you’re used to Electrum, then you’ll have no problem jumping on board with its sister technology.
Other wallets that support BCH include Keepkey, BTC.com, Bitpay, and Coinomi. You can view all available wallets on the official Bitcoin Cash website.
Once you have your wallet, you will need your Bitcoin Cash address. It’s a long string of letters and numbers that start with either a “1” or a “3” — similar to normal Bitcoin addresses.
Since many people got confused and started sending Bitcoins to Bitcoin Cash wallets and vice versa, a new format was invented for Bitcoin Cash. The format, called “Cash Address” is 42 characters long and starts with a “p” or a “q”. Here’s an example:
qpm2qsznhks23z7629mms6s4cwef74vcwvy22gdx6a
Keep in mind that Cash Addresses are just a representation of original Bitcoin Cash addresses. This means that the same address can be represented in two different ways (normal format or Cash Address format).
Not all wallets support Cash address format.

Step 2: Find a Bitcoin Cash Exchange

Most Bitcoin exchanges will also allow you to buy Bitcoin Cash, here are top ones around.
Buy Bitcoin Cash Through eToro
eToro allows users from around the world to buy and sell Bitcoin Cash with a variety of payment methods.
eToro is more aimed towards investing in BCH for making a profit in fiat currency (i.e. Dollars, Euros, etc.) rather than actually using it. That being said, eToro does give you access to your coins and allows you to send coins from eToro to other people.
If you use eToro for investment only, you don’t actually need a Bitcoin Cash wallet as you won’t be withdrawing the coins.
*75% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should consider whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money. CFDs are not offered to US users. Cryptoassets are highly volatile unregulated investment products. No EU investor protection.
Buy Bitcoin Cash Through Coinmama
Coinmama, one of the oldest exchanges around, allows you to buy Bitcoin Cash with a credit card, debit card or SEPA transfer. Coinmama accepts users from almost all countries around the world.
Buy Bitcoin Cash Through CEX.io
CEX.IO, based in London, is a trusted, experienced name in the industry, having been around since 2013. You can choose from a selection of cryptocurrencies on the site, including Bitcoin Cash.
The exchange has a brokerage service (easier to use, more expensive) and a trading platform (cheaper but more complex).CEX accepts credit cards, debit cards, wire transfers and SEPA.
Buy Bitcoin Cash Through Coinbase
Coinbase is a reputable Bitcoin exchange that supplies a variety of other services including a wallet, a trading platform (Coinbase Pro) and a Bitcoin debit card.
If you’re a beginner, it’s probably best to use the brokerage service which is a bit more expensive, but easier to use. Advanced users can use Coinbase Pro to buy Bitcoin Cash with lower fees.
Coinbase accepts debit cards and wire transfers.
Buy Bitcoin Cash Through Bitstamp
Bitstamp, the oldest exchange around, supports the trading of BCH to Bitcoin and direct purchases with US dollars or Euros. There’s also an option to buy Bitcoin Cash with your credit card at a higher price.
If you know your way around Bitcoin trading platforms it’s best to use that service and not the credit card service since you’ll save substantially on fees.
Other options to purchase Bitcoin Cash include Bitfinex, Cryptmixer, Kraken, Poloniex, HitBTC, and more (you can view all available exchanges on Bitcoin Cash’s website).

Step 3: Transfer the BCH to your wallet

As usual, I recommend that you never leave money on an exchange.
Once you’ve finished buying your Bitcoin Cash, move it to your own wallet (the one you chose in step 1). You can then follow the status of your transaction using a Bitcoin Cash block explorer.
Once you receive three confirmations for your Bitcoin Cash, you can safely say you’ve completed the process.

Conclusion

It’s apparent that Bitcoin Cash has still not gained full acceptance by large parts of the cryptocurrency community. It still sits firmly in second place to its older brother in terms of both price and usage.
Bitcoin Cash has the advantage of being the first major split that has garnered acceptance. Most forks after it didn’t receive nearly enough attention from the community or the media.
However, with internal conflicts inside its founding team and accelerated Bitcoin development for scalability solutions, I’m not sure if there’s an actual use case for Bitcoin Cash other than price speculation.
submitted by MonishaNuij to MonMonCrypto [link] [comments]

[ Bitcoin ] Technical: Taproot: Why Activate?

Topic originally posted in Bitcoin by almkglor [link]
This is a follow-up on https://old.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/hqzp14/technical_the_path_to_taproot_activation/
Taproot! Everybody wants it!! But... you might ask yourself: sure, everybody else wants it, but why would I, sovereign Bitcoin HODLer, want it? Surely I can be better than everybody else because I swapped XXX fiat for Bitcoin unlike all those nocoiners?
And it is important for you to know the reasons why you, o sovereign Bitcoiner, would want Taproot activated. After all, your nodes (or the nodes your wallets use, which if you are SPV, you hopefully can pester to your wallet vendoimplementor about) need to be upgraded in order for Taproot activation to actually succeed instead of becoming a hot sticky mess.
First, let's consider some principles of Bitcoin.
I'm sure most of us here would agree that the above are very important principles of Bitcoin and that these are principles we would not be willing to remove. If anything, we would want those principles strengthened (especially the last one, financial privacy, which current Bitcoin is only sporadically strong with: you can get privacy, it just requires effort to do so).
So, how does Taproot affect those principles?

Taproot and Your /Coins

Most HODLers probably HODL their coins in singlesig addresses. Sadly, switching to Taproot would do very little for you (it gives a mild discount at spend time, at the cost of a mild increase in fee at receive time (paid by whoever sends to you, so if it's a self-send from a P2PKH or bech32 address, you pay for this); mostly a wash).
(technical details: a Taproot output is 1 version byte + 32 byte public key, while a P2WPKH (bech32 singlesig) output is 1 version byte + 20 byte public key hash, so the Taproot output spends 12 bytes more; spending from a P2WPKH requires revealing a 32-byte public key later, which is not needed with Taproot, and Taproot signatures are about 9 bytes smaller than P2WPKH signatures, but the 32 bytes plus 9 bytes is divided by 4 because of the witness discount, so it saves about 11 bytes; mostly a wash, it increases blockweight by about 1 virtual byte, 4 weight for each Taproot-output-input, compared to P2WPKH-output-input).
However, as your HODLings grow in value, you might start wondering if multisignature k-of-n setups might be better for the security of your savings. And it is in multisignature that Taproot starts to give benefits!
Taproot switches to using Schnorr signing scheme. Schnorr makes key aggregation -- constructing a single public key from multiple public keys -- almost as trivial as adding numbers together. "Almost" because it involves some fairly advanced math instead of simple boring number adding, but hey when was the last time you added up your grocery list prices by hand huh?
With current P2SH and P2WSH multisignature schemes, if you have a 2-of-3 setup, then to spend, you need to provide two different signatures from two different public keys. With Taproot, you can create, using special moon math, a single public key that represents your 2-of-3 setup. Then you just put two of your devices together, have them communicate to each other (this can be done airgapped, in theory, by sending QR codes: the software to do this is not even being built yet, but that's because Taproot hasn't activated yet!), and they will make a single signature to authorize any spend from your 2-of-3 address. That's 73 witness bytes -- 18.25 virtual bytes -- of signatures you save!
And if you decide that your current setup with 1-of-1 P2PKH / P2WPKH addresses is just fine as-is: well, that's the whole point of a softfork: backwards-compatibility; you can receive from Taproot users just fine, and once your wallet is updated for Taproot-sending support, you can send to Taproot users just fine as well!
(P2WPKH and P2WSH -- SegWit v0 -- addresses start with bc1q; Taproot -- SegWit v1 --- addresses start with bc1p, in case you wanted to know the difference; in bech32 q is 0, p is 1)
Now how about HODLers who keep all, or some, of their coins on custodial services? Well, any custodial service worth its salt would be doing at least 2-of-3, or probably something even bigger, like 11-of-15. So your custodial service, if it switched to using Taproot internally, could save a lot more (imagine an 11-of-15 getting reduced from 11 signatures to just 1!), which --- we can only hope! --- should translate to lower fees and better customer service from your custodial service!
So I think we can say, very accurately, that the Bitcoin principle --- that YOU are in control of your money --- can only be helped by Taproot (if you are doing multisignature), and, because P2PKH and P2WPKH remain validly-usable addresses in a Taproot future, will not be harmed by Taproot. Its benefit to this principle might be small (it mostly only benefits multisignature users) but since it has no drawbacks with this (i.e. singlesig users can continue to use P2WPKH and P2PKH still) this is still a nice, tidy win!
(even singlesig users get a minor benefit, in that multisig users will now reduce their blockchain space footprint, so that fees can be kept low for everybody; so for example even if you have your single set of private keys engraved on titanium plates sealed in an airtight box stored in a safe buried in a desert protected by angry nomads riding giant sandworms because you're the frickin' Kwisatz Haderach, you still gain some benefit from Taproot)
And here's the important part: if P2PKH/P2WPKH is working perfectly fine with you and you decide to never use Taproot yourself, Taproot will not affect you detrimentally. First do no harm!

Taproot and Your Contracts

No one is an island, no one lives alone. Give and you shall receive. You know: by trading with other people, you can gain expertise in some obscure little necessity of the world (and greatly increase your productivity in that little field), and then trade the products of your expertise for necessities other people have created, all of you thereby gaining gains from trade.
So, contracts, which are basically enforceable agreements that facilitate trading with people who you do not personally know and therefore might not trust.
Let's start with a simple example. You want to buy some gewgaws from somebody. But you don't know them personally. The seller wants the money, you want their gewgaws, but because of the lack of trust (you don't know them!! what if they're scammers??) neither of you can benefit from gains from trade.
However, suppose both of you know of some entity that both of you trust. That entity can act as a trusted escrow. The entity provides you security: this enables the trade, allowing both of you to get gains from trade.
In Bitcoin-land, this can be implemented as a 2-of-3 multisignature. The three signatories in the multisgnature would be you, the gewgaw seller, and the escrow. You put the payment for the gewgaws into this 2-of-3 multisignature address.
Now, suppose it turns out neither of you are scammers (whaaaat!). You receive the gewgaws just fine and you're willing to pay up for them. Then you and the gewgaw seller just sign a transaction --- you and the gewgaw seller are 2, sufficient to trigger the 2-of-3 --- that spends from the 2-of-3 address to a singlesig the gewgaw seller wants (or whatever address the gewgaw seller wants).
But suppose some problem arises. The seller gave you gawgews instead of gewgaws. Or you decided to keep the gewgaws but not sign the transaction to release the funds to the seller. In either case, the escrow is notified, and if it can sign with you to refund the funds back to you (if the seller was a scammer) or it can sign with the seller to forward the funds to the seller (if you were a scammer).
Taproot helps with this: like mentioned above, it allows multisignature setups to produce only one signature, reducing blockchain space usage, and thus making contracts --- which require multiple people, by definition, you don't make contracts with yourself --- is made cheaper (which we hope enables more of these setups to happen for more gains from trade for everyone, also, moon and lambos).
(technology-wise, it's easier to make an n-of-n than a k-of-n, making a k-of-n would require a complex setup involving a long ritual with many communication rounds between the n participants, but an n-of-n can be done trivially with some moon math. You can, however, make what is effectively a 2-of-3 by using a three-branch SCRIPT: either 2-of-2 of you and seller, OR 2-of-2 of you and escrow, OR 2-of-2 of escrow and seller. Fortunately, Taproot adds a facility to embed a SCRIPT inside a public key, so you can have a 2-of-2 Taprooted address (between you and seller) with a SCRIPT branch that can instead be spent with 2-of-2 (you + escrow) OR 2-of-2 (seller + escrow), which implements the three-branched SCRIPT above. If neither of you are scammers (hopefully the common case) then you both sign using your keys and never have to contact the escrow, since you are just using the escrow public key without coordinating with them (because n-of-n is trivial but k-of-n requires setup with communication rounds), so in the "best case" where both of you are honest traders, you also get a privacy boost, in that the escrow never learns you have been trading on gewgaws, I mean ewww, gawgews are much better than gewgaws and therefore I now judge you for being a gewgaw enthusiast, you filthy gewgawer).

Taproot and Your Contracts, Part 2: Cryptographic Boogaloo

Now suppose you want to buy some data instead of things. For example, maybe you have some closed-source software in trial mode installed, and want to pay the developer for the full version. You want to pay for an activation code.
This can be done, today, by using an HTLC. The developer tells you the hash of the activation code. You pay to an HTLC, paying out to the developer if it reveals the preimage (the activation code), or refunding the money back to you after a pre-agreed timeout. If the developer claims the funds, it has to reveal the preimage, which is the activation code, and you can now activate your software. If the developer does not claim the funds by the timeout, you get refunded.
And you can do that, with HTLCs, today.
Of course, HTLCs do have problems:
Fortunately, with Schnorr (which is enabled by Taproot), we can now use the Scriptless Script constuction by Andrew Poelstra. This Scriptless Script allows a new construction, the PTLC or Pointlocked Timelocked Contract. Instead of hashes and preimages, just replace "hash" with "point" and "preimage" with "scalar".
Or as you might know them: "point" is really "public key" and "scalar" is really a "private key". What a PTLC does is that, given a particular public key, the pointlocked branch can be spent only if the spender reveals the private key of the given private key to you.
Another nice thing with PTLCs is that they are deniable. What appears onchain is just a single 2-of-2 signature between you and the developemanufacturer. It's like a magic trick. This signature has no special watermarks, it's a perfectly normal signature (the pledge). However, from this signature, plus some datta given to you by the developemanufacturer (known as the adaptor signature) you can derive the private key of a particular public key you both agree on (the turn). Anyone scraping the blockchain will just see signatures that look just like every other signature, and as long as nobody manages to hack you and get a copy of the adaptor signature or the private key, they cannot get the private key behind the public key (point) that the pointlocked branch needs (the prestige).
(Just to be clear, the public key you are getting the private key from, is distinct from the public key that the developemanufacturer will use for its funds. The activation key is different from the developer's onchain Bitcoin key, and it is the activation key whose private key you will be learning, not the developer's/manufacturer's onchain Bitcoin key).
So:
Taproot lets PTLCs exist onchain because they enable Schnorr, which is a requirement of PTLCs / Scriptless Script.
(technology-wise, take note that Scriptless Script works only for the "pointlocked" branch of the contract; you need normal Script, or a pre-signed nLockTimed transaction, for the "timelocked" branch. Since Taproot can embed a script, you can have the Taproot pubkey be a 2-of-2 to implement the Scriptless Script "pointlocked" branch, then have a hidden script that lets you recover the funds with an OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY after the timeout if the seller does not claim the funds.)

Quantum Quibbles!

Now if you were really paying attention, you might have noticed this parenthetical:
(technical details: a Taproot output is 1 version byte + 32 byte public key, while a P2WPKH (bech32 singlesig) output is 1 version byte + 20 byte public key hash...)
So wait, Taproot uses raw 32-byte public keys, and not public key hashes? Isn't that more quantum-vulnerable??
Well, in theory yes. In practice, they probably are not.
It's not that hashes can be broken by quantum computes --- they're still not. Instead, you have to look at how you spend from a P2WPKH/P2PKH pay-to-public-key-hash.
When you spend from a P2PKH / P2WPKH, you have to reveal the public key. Then Bitcoin hashes it and checks if this matches with the public-key-hash, and only then actually validates the signature for that public key.
So an unconfirmed transaction, floating in the mempools of nodes globally, will show, in plain sight for everyone to see, your public key.
(public keys should be public, that's why they're called public keys, LOL)
And if quantum computers are fast enough to be of concern, then they are probably fast enough that, in the several minutes to several hours from broadcast to confirmation, they have already cracked the public key that is openly broadcast with your transaction. The owner of the quantum computer can now replace your unconfirmed transaction with one that pays the funds to itself. Even if you did not opt-in RBF, miners are still incentivized to support RBF on RBF-disabled transactions.
So the extra hash is not as significant a protection against quantum computers as you might think. Instead, the extra hash-and-compare needed is just extra validation effort.
Further, if you have ever, in the past, spent from the address, then there exists already a transaction indelibly stored on the blockchain, openly displaying the public key from which quantum computers can derive the private key. So those are still vulnerable to quantum computers.
For the most part, the cryptographers behind Taproot (and Bitcoin Core) are of the opinion that quantum computers capable of cracking Bitcoin pubkeys are unlikely to appear within a decade or two.
So:
For now, the homomorphic and linear properties of elliptic curve cryptography provide a lot of benefits --- particularly the linearity property is what enables Scriptless Script and simple multisignature (i.e. multisignatures that are just 1 signature onchain). So it might be a good idea to take advantage of them now while we are still fairly safe against quantum computers. It seems likely that quantum-safe signature schemes are nonlinear (thus losing these advantages).

Summary

I Wanna Be The Taprooter!

So, do you want to help activate Taproot? Here's what you, mister sovereign Bitcoin HODLer, can do!

But I Hate Taproot!!

That's fine!

Discussions About Taproot Activation

almkglor your post has been copied because one or more comments in this topic have been removed. This copy will preserve unmoderated topic. If you would like to opt-out, please send a message using [this link].
[deleted comment]
[deleted comment]
[deleted comment]
submitted by anticensor_bot to u/anticensor_bot [link] [comments]

what the hell is going on with btc transactions?

Ok, I'm really happy that btc hit 1900$ tonight. But I'm so disappointed about the fact that there are more that 227k of unconfirmed transactions right now. Could anybody tell me what's the reason?
submitted by chainmaze to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[Weekly Report] BSV transaction fee is lower

[Weekly Report] BSV transaction fee is lower
Dear friends of LivesOne,

As block sizes get bigger and technology improves, BSV community hopes that more people can use the BSV public data ledger to reduce transaction fee.
On May 13, TAAL, the transaction processor, processed a block of 309MB in size, which contains 1178322 transactions, with a total transaction fee of up to 0.788BSV. If denominated in legal tender, the average fee per transaction is about 0.0009 Yuan RMB.

https://preview.redd.it/l5as5227fuz41.png?width=1240&format=png&auto=webp&s=4abcb3767200719104ccdc54167eb74021666587

  • Current rate of BSV transaction fee
In the Bitcoin market, miners participate in blockchain mining with an aim to make profits. However, as the Bitcoin network recently experienced its halving, transaction fees gradually become more important. The future competition will focus on those transaction processors who can handle more network transactions.
At the beginning of this year, MemPool, the leader of BSV mining pool, announced that they would work with Tall and Coingeek mining, bitcoin mining giants,to support enterprise blockchain applications and reduce the transaction fees. The statement marks the birth of a new trend in which mining companies seek more sustainable profit models to ensure their long-term development.
Transaction processor is expected to adjust its BSV transaction fee rates as relevant to respond to market forces. It will be implementing the following changes to transaction fees charged by its cloud computing operations on the BSV network:
  1. A reduction in the transaction acceptance fee (-blockmintxfee) from 1 satoshi/byte to 0.5 satoshis/byte.
  2. A reduction in the relay fee (-minrelaytxfee which is the minimum fee required for double spend protection and for relaying of a transaction) from 1 satoshi/byte to 0.25 satoshis/byte.
  3. In an additional, but unrelated, change the restrictive limit of 25 unconfirmed ancestors will be immediately raised from 25 to 50.

  • Expectation of BSV transaction fee
Many enterprises are exploring blockchain applications to improve their business. These projects are becoming more and more common, but there are some challenges in the application of the public chain. Bitcoin transaction fees are not expressed in legal tender, but in "sat / byte". Therefore, transaction fees in legal tender price will fluctuate with the fluctuation of the price of bitcoin.
TAAL promises to regularly check the lower BSV transaction fees to maintain stable transaction fees in legal tender. Large enterprises usually want to be able to predict their costs, so stable transaction fees are expected to attract more enterprises to use BSV for data applications.
In addition, due to the difficulty in corporate policy and accounting treatment, enterprises do not or cannot show holding digital assets on their balance sheets. Business participants in the BSV ecosystem have recently begun to explore alternate transaction fee models that provide, in fiat currency terms, greater reliability for BSV business applications – including business deals for miners to directly handle a particular application’s set of transactions for negotiated fee rates or development of tools that enable greater fee customization to be offered by miners to applications.
This evolving fee marketplace is new to bitcoin; it was not possible on the Bitcoin Core network due to its smaller block size and significantly higher transaction fees. This new fee marketplace is only recently enabled by BSV’s greater data and microtransaction capabilities. It is expected that this will bring more users to BSV and attract more partners to strengthen its ecosystem.
With the increasing of BSV trading volume, we can also see the further reduction of transaction fee rate. BSV promises an exciting blockchain future. LivesOne's vision is to enable more ordinary people to use better blockchain applications, and lower fee will help LivesOne realize its vision. LivesOne is eager to participate in the future construction of blockchain with you.

Symbiosism Economy Foundation
May 20, 2020
submitted by LivesoneToken to LivesOne [link] [comments]

Announcement: Symphony_IOHK Releases Symphony-Web 2.0

Announcement: Symphony_IOHK Releases Symphony-Web 2.0

View from inside a blockchain galaxy
The Symphony project began with a question: how do we represent blockchain technology in a way that is stimulating, entertaining, and audio-visually engaging for a wider audience, technical and non-technical. In other words, how do we explain the abstract and give form to the formless.

It’s been over a year since we answered that question, and we’re still working to make Symphony the most interactive and immersive blockchain experience available. What began as a way to visualize the blockchain has evolved into a way to experience the blockchain: an immersive journey accessible through your device’s browser.

The result is Symphony 2.0: a 3D explorer through which anyone can traverse the topographic history of the Bitcoin blockchain, from the first transaction to the most recent. Compared with the first version, Symphony 2.0 goes deeper in every way. It drills down into transaction data to create a live soundscape – each block has its own unique audio signature – using data-driven sound synthesis. It looks like this:


Soar over the galaxies of blockchians

How it Works

As you can imagine, giving feeling to data isn’t easy. Creating a sound for each block was how I wanted to represent the uniqueness and permanence of the blockchain: once added, a block is there forever, making that same sound, containing those same transactions.

I used a technique called additive synthesis to generate sound on the fly, and utilized the parallel nature of graphics cards to synthesize a unique sound for each of the thousands of transactions that can make up a block. The sound signature that plays when you visit a block consists of each transaction producing eight sine waves (a fundamental pitch and seven harmonics). The fundamental pitch is determined by the transaction value, and the amount of randomness added to the harmonics partials is controlled by the fee-to-value ratio of the transaction.

https://preview.redd.it/w6be8pwjb5931.png?width=1114&format=png&auto=webp&s=856bbc3572cf535a35ea20a086daa467e6512e8e

Design Philosophy

With Symphony 2.0, the blockchain’s mempool – which stores unconfirmed transactions – is visualized as a gravitational swell, around which confirmed transactions spiral in concentric rings. Think of Saturn’s rings but, instead of particles of ice and rock, we have transactions, continuously adding to the size of the rings as they extend outwards. Then, undergirding each block are Merkle trees represented, unsurprisingly, as trees.

https://preview.redd.it/exoldf4lb5931.png?width=1120&format=png&auto=webp&s=07c632b930131b94b4852293bfe6272b4a9ef90f
On top of each block, confirmed transactions are visualized as 3D hexagons. Their height corresponds to the transaction volume, and their width (note the rotund individuals to the right of the image above) corresponds to the health of the block. The result is an unprecedented imagining of the blockchain, with its representative parts synced and manifest, explorable block-by-block or through a flight-simulator mode.

Ways to Experience Symphony

Symphony 2.0 is now live It can be accessed using any modern web browser, but is best experienced in Google Chrome. For laptop and mobile device users, it’s advised to select the Medium quality option and, for those with high-performance devices or dedicated graphics support, the High quality option. Performance optimizations will continue into the future.

Together with our friends at Kuva, a Bristol-based creative agency, we’ve also grown the project to include events and exhibition pieces. These events – one of which was held this year in Bristol – have included a number of exhibitions that showcase different parts of the project, including virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR).

Using WebVR software, I built a VR experience based on the code for Symphony 2.0, which demonstrates the extensibility of the system. This will be exhibited at future events and, I hope, one day available for VR headsets at home.

What’s Next

We’re going on tour. We have the story, and now we need an audience. I’m also starting to build an Ethereum version using the same code base, which will feature explorable smart contracts, and, after that, Cardano. We know there are thousands of people out there who are only faintly familiar with blockchain technology and want to know more – and with Symphony 2.0, they’ll be able to cut through the confusion. A picture tells a thousand words, and an interactive audio-visual experience tells many more.

Symphony is a long-term project. It’s as much an adventure for us as our audience. We want to see how far we can take it – because blockchain technology is still developing, still growing, and the opportunity for education is only just beginning. The release of Symphony 2.0 marks a significant milestone for us, and we’re thrilled to be sharing it with you. There’s a lot of opportunity for Symphony, from optimizations and incorporation of other blockchains, to events and more ways to enjoy Symphony at home. So, stay tuned for more updates and, in the meantime, enjoy the world’s first interactive blockchain experience.
- Blog Post by Scott Darby, IOHK Creative Coder

Experience Symphony Web Now

-
https://iohk.io/blog/announcing-the-release-of-symphony-2/
submitted by Classic_Kevin_ETC to cardano [link] [comments]

Ever Flown Around Inside Bitcoin? IOHK Introduces Symphony 2.0: The first ever 3D, immersive blockchain explorer

Ever Flown Around Inside Bitcoin? IOHK Introduces Symphony 2.0: The first ever 3D, immersive blockchain explorer

(L) Bitcoin transactions: The higher the larger value; (R) Mempool w/ incoming tx.s
The Symphony project began with a question: how do we represent blockchain technology in a way that is stimulating, entertaining, and audio-visually engaging for a wider audience, technical and non-technical. In other words, how do we explain the abstract and give form to the formless.

It’s been over a year since we answered that question, and we’re still working to make Symphony the most interactive and immersive blockchain experience available. What began as a way to visualize the blockchain has evolved into a way to experience the blockchain: an immersive journey accessible through your device’s browser.

The result is Symphony 2.0: a 3D explorer through which anyone can traverse the topographic history of the Bitcoin blockchain, from the first transaction to the most recent. Compared with the first version, Symphony 2.0 goes deeper in every way. It drills down into transaction data to create a live soundscape – each block has its own unique audio signature – using data-driven sound synthesis. It looks like this:


The flight simulation over the bitcoin network. Watch out for incoming tx.s!

How it Works

As you can imagine, giving feeling to data isn’t easy. Creating a sound for each block was how I wanted to represent the uniqueness and permanence of the blockchain: once added, a block is there forever, making that same sound, containing those same transactions.

I used a technique called additive synthesis to generate sound on the fly, and utilized the parallel nature of graphics cards to synthesize a unique sound for each of the thousands of transactions that can make up a block. The sound signature that plays when you visit a block consists of each transaction producing eight sine waves (a fundamental pitch and seven harmonics). The fundamental pitch is determined by the transaction value, and the amount of randomness added to the harmonics partials is controlled by the fee-to-value ratio of the transaction.

View looking up: Merkle trees under respective blocks; Mempool on the right

Design Philosophy

With Symphony 2.0, the blockchain’s mempool – which stores unconfirmed transactions – is visualized as a gravitational swell, around which confirmed transactions spiral in concentric rings. Think of Saturn’s rings but, instead of particles of ice and rock, we have transactions, continuously adding to the size of the rings as they extend outwards. Then, undergirding each block are Merkle trees represented, unsurprisingly, as trees.

View Top Down: Transactions as pillars, on top of blocks, on top of Merkle trees; Mempool in background
On top of each block, confirmed transactions are visualized as 3D hexagons. Their height corresponds to the transaction volume, and their width (note the rotund individuals to the right of the image above) corresponds to the health of the block. The result is an unprecedented imagining of the blockchain, with its representative parts synced and manifest, explorable block-by-block or through a flight-simulator mode.

Ways to Experience Symphony

Symphony 2.0 is now live It can be accessed using any modern web browser, but is best experienced in Google Chrome. For laptop and mobile device users, it’s advised to select the Medium quality option and, for those with high-performance devices or dedicated graphics support, the High quality option. Performance optimizations will continue into the future.

Together with our friends at Kuva, a Bristol-based creative agency, we’ve also grown the project to include events and exhibition pieces. These events – one of which was held this year in Bristol – have included a number of exhibitions that showcase different parts of the project, including virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR).

Using WebVR software, I built a VR experience based on the code for Symphony 2.0, which demonstrates the extensibility of the system. This will be exhibited at future events and, I hope, one day available for VR headsets at home.

What’s Next

We’re going on tour. We have the story, and now we need an audience. I’m also starting to build an Ethereum version using the same code base, which will feature explorable smart contracts, and, more networks after that. We know there are thousands of people out there who are only faintly familiar with blockchain technology and want to know more – and with Symphony 2.0, they’ll be able to cut through the confusion. A picture tells a thousand words, and an interactive audio-visual experience tells many more.

Symphony is a long-term project. It’s as much an adventure for us as our audience. We want to see how far we can take it – because blockchain technology is still developing, still growing, and the opportunity for education is only just beginning. The release of Symphony 2.0 marks a significant milestone for us, and we’re thrilled to be sharing it with you. There’s a lot of opportunity for Symphony, from optimizations and incorporation of other blockchains, to events and more ways to enjoy Symphony at home. So, stay tuned for more updates and, in the meantime, enjoy the world’s first interactive blockchain experience.
- Blog Post by Scott Darby, IOHK Creative Coder

Experience Symphony Web Now


Original BlogPost
submitted by Classic_Kevin_ETC to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Critque of Roger Ver vs. Tone Vays debate.

  1. With respect to the price of bitcoin transactions. Roger Ver is lying here. You can go and see what the average fee is and the average fee hasn't come close to 3 dollars. Where he might get this is from his wallet which purposefully has high fees. That's programming he put in and is not reflective of the real world use of Bitcoin. Tone's assessment of the fees is actually accurate.
  2. Bitcoin Cash is not secure. It doesn't have the proper hashrate and since it uses the same algorithm as Bitcoin a far larger network it's inherently vulnerable to 51 % attacks. It recently just went through a reorg carried out by 2 of the large mining pools on Bitcoin Cash. Bitcoin Cash proponents claim that unconfirmed transactions are safe. Satoshi never believed unconfirmed transactions were safe for a number of reasons. Despite numerous double spends being executed on the network the proponents continue to make this lie. lightning transactions are cheaper than bitcoin cash. Lightning is suitable for micro transactions (actually less than a satoshi) and they are secure. 99% as secure as bitcoin transactions since it is the Bitcoin blockchain that is behind them. The only issue would be some kind of issue where you couldn't be on the network for an extended period of time and you're connected to a node that tries to steal from you. This will be resolved in the future (also thanks to segwit).
  3. You're really only in complete control of your own money if you run a full node. SPV wallets are great, but you're trusting other nodes. The Eclair wallet is similar to an SPV wallet (uses that same technology) but it is more secure. On Chain SPV wallets you are trusting nodes every transaction. With a SPV/Lightning wallet like Eclair you're only trusting it for 2 transactions per channel and from there you can have many secure transactions. You can also run a full node lightning network as well. It's slightly more cumbersome. Setting up a full node lightning wallet takes 2 times as long as setting up a full node bitcoin wallet because of the extra indexing that is required. It takes roughly the same amount of time to setup a full node bitcoin wallet as it does to do a full node bitcoin cash wallet. Roger isn't comparing apples to apples here. You're not in full control of your money with an SPV wallet using Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash, but it's a fine solution for most people doing day to day transactions.
Roger always tries to setup his debates in order to win. He typically has easy opponents. The Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash debate comes down to the technicals. If you believe in money owned by the people then look at the technicals you will see that Bitcoin Cash does not provide this as an option. The one time Roger had a debate with a technical person he was dominated it was on the Tom Woods show with Jameson Lopp I believe. Roger's political level debates (where logical fallacies are quite effective) works well because he keeps it about economics "bribing" the people with promises of fast/cheap transactions when in reality he uses half truths to make these claims.
There is a lot of money behind the disinformation marketing campaign behind Bitcoin Cash. As evidence I reference the Bitcoin.com wallet which purposefully uses insane fees for Bitcoin to slander Bitcoin.
Don't trust me. Look at the fundamentals of Bitcoin and Blockchains in general and you'll see Bitcoin has a great path and excellent development behind it.
submitted by lizard450 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

IOTA Definition

IOTA Definition
History of IOTA
The blockchain was announced in October 2015 through. The roots of IOTA go back to the Jinn project. That project aimed to develop ternary hardware or low-cost and energy-efficient hardware, primarily general-purpose processors, for use in the IoT ecosystem. Jinn held a crowd sale for its tokens in September 2014. The Jinn tokens were soon in hot water because they marketed as profit-sharing tokens.. In 2015, Jinn was rebranded as IOTA, and another token sale was held. This time around, the tokens were marketed as utility tokens, and Jinn token holders could exchange their tokens at equivalency with the new blockchain. According to David Sønstebø, IOTA was “spawned” due to the Jinn project. But reports state that a snapshot of the genesis transaction is yet to be found online. These tokens were dispersed to other “founder” addresses. The total number of mIOTAs planned to be in existence is 27 quadrillion. According to IOTA’s founders, the total number of mIOTAs fits in “nicely” with the maximum allowable integer value in Javascript, a programming language.
Understanding IOTA
According to research firm Gartner, there will be 20.4 billion devices connected to the Internet by 2020. Within this ecosystem, each device will exchange data and payment information with multiple, other devices in transactions conducted throughout the day. IOTA intends to become the standard mode of conducting transactions on devices. Its founders have described the ledger as a “public permission-less backbone for the Internet of Things that enables interoperability between multiple devices.” In simple words, this means that it will enable transactions between connected devices, and anyone will be able to access it. Those problems are primarily caused due to a backlog of transactions on Bitcoin’s blockchain. The backlog itself is because of a variety of reasons, from small block sizes to the difficulty of puzzles that miners must solve to earn the cryptocurrency as a reward. IOTA solves these problems by reconfiguring blockchain's architecture into Tangle, a new way of organizing data and confirming transactions.
How Does IOTA Solve Bitcoin’s Scalability Problems?
IOTA’s solution to Bitcoin’s problems is to do away with several key concepts and topographical constraints of a blockchain. mIOTA, IOTA’s cryptocurrency, is pre-mined and consensus of transactions occurs differently as compared to a blockchain. IOTA developers have proposed a new data structure. Tangle is a Decentralized Acyclic Graph, a system of nodes which is not sequential. Thus, each node can be connected to multiple other nodes in a Tangle. But they are connected only in a particular direction, meaning that a node cannot refer back to itself. A standard blockchain is also a DAG because it is a sequential linked set. In Bitcoin, a group of systems running full nodes that contain the entire history of transactions for a ledger are required for confirmations and consensus. Full node miners are not required in Tangle. Each new transaction is confirmed by referencing two previous transactions, reducing the amount of time and memory required to confirm a transaction. Related to the concept of a “confidence” is a transaction’s weight. As it moves through Tangle, a transaction gathers weight. A transaction’s weight increases with the number of approvals. Once a transaction is confirmed, it is broadcast to the entire network, and another unconfirmed transaction can choose the newly-confirmed transaction as one of the tips to confirm itself.
Governance Protocol
IOTA has not outlined a governance structure for its blockchain. The IOTA Foundation is primarily responsible for funding and leading development of IOTA. In a previous post, John Licciardello, former managing director of IOTA's Ecosystem Development Fund (EDF), that would allow members of the IOTA community to vote on proposals regarding its future direction. But there are no updates on the initiative yet.
Concerns About IOTA
Criticism of IOTA has mainly centered around its technical flaws. As with most cryptocurrencies, IOTA’s system is nascent and unproven. A phishing attack on its network resulted in the theft of mIOTA worth $3.94 million. In other words, they created their encryption scheme from scratch, forgoing the widely-used SHA-256 hash function used in Bitcoin. The team at MIT’s Digital Currency Initiative found serious vulnerabilities with IOTA’s hash function, which is called Curl. This property is known as Collision and denotes a broken hash function. In their analysis of the vulnerability, the MIT team stated that a bad actor could have destroyed or stolen user funds from Tangle with their technique. IOTA’s team has corrected the vulnerability. The foundation announced a new partnership with Ledger, one of the leading producers of hardware wallets. IOTA technology will be integrated into the hardware wallets, giving users the ability to store the private key information in a device that adds another layer of protection from hackers.
https://preview.redd.it/ex768bb74gw31.jpg?width=777&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4e89f0875410274a85b76227c17d321b5c3d29ed
“The collaboration between the teams created an immediate synergy concentrated on developing a compatibility feature allowing users to access, store and manage IOTA tokens on Ledger devices. 

The IOTA (MIOTA) digital asset suffered from a lack of adequate wallets for months, even at the peak of the market. The asset, which commanded prices above $5, was not spared by the bear market. Despite the launch of the long-awaited Trinity wallet, MIOTA lost positions. Given that mIOTA, the crypto used in IOTA, is still to gain mainstream traction, its claims to eliminate scalability problems for blockchains through the use of DAGs are also still to be proven. Vitalik Buterin, the co-founder of Ethereum, has cast doubt on the ability of hashgraphs to solve scalability issues.
Another problem with IOTA currently is the small size of its network. Researchers have found that hackers need only gain control of 33% of the total hashing power required to bring it down. In Bitcoin, control of 51% of a network is required to bring its blockchain down. To ensure security, IOTA’s network currently uses a central server known as a Coordinator to process transactions. This practice has diluted its claims of being a decentralized system since the introduction of a Coordinator has resulted in the introduction of a single point of failure.
The consensus system is described in a new white paper. In the past, IOTA has been criticized for its hidden centralization, as well as for the loss of coins sometimes happening when a user’s wallet was unable to receive its previous balances from the state of the Tangle.
But despite the innovation, IOTA lags behind digital assets that are receiving the most significant inflows of investment and trading liquidity.
submitted by Avra11 to u/Avra11 [link] [comments]

About reducing the BCH block time, I have something to say...

I want to introduce myself by first (to avoid to be considered to be troll).
My name is Danny, Chinese, my first contact with Bitcoin was in 2013. My background is integrated circuit design. I studied C/C++ and linux in the college 15 years ago. I am not very familiar with open source software design, but my technology background is good enough to let me learn things quickly. I have developed a FPGA based SHA-256 miner and succesfully connect to the Eligius pool in early 2014 (Just for fun), all by C and verilog. I am a developer but not a professional software developer.
I am familiar with Bitcoin, transaction and block structure. I developed a program which can upload and download arbitrary file from/to the Bitcoincash blockchain. The downloader code is open sourced: https://github.com/bchfile/BCHFILE-extractor
I think I am not a troll.
Although many users and devs think Blocktime is not an issue, but a simple fact is that there is no single mainstream crypto choose a blocktime equal or larger than 10 minutes (No offense to anyone, I just express the idea that this is an undeniable proof that a shortter confirmation time has real needs).
For wallet users: If someone send me some BCH, although 0-conf gives some confidence, but I still need to wait for at least 1 confirmation to "make sure" someone else is not cheeting me (not 100%, but 1 confirm really means something), each more confirmation makes more confidence.
For nodes: You cannot spend a unconfirmed UTXO by default, you need to list the unspent UTXO and use createrawtransaction, signrawtransaction to manually create the TX and broadcast it. That means you need to wait for the TX to be confirmed before spend it by default.
Variance: (Here, I want to say sorry to many people especially some devs, in the previous posts, I did not show enough respect to them. In fact, the developers have done a lot of excellent work, most of which are unpaid, but not well known to the public.) The Variance is already been discussed by devs a long time, bobtail algorithm is a potential alternative, I have not figure it out by now, but reduce the block time can achieve a similar result, it's simple, 10 1-min block have an averagy effect, it has much less variance than 1 10-min block.
For exchanges: Obviously the exchanges plays the most important role in the crypto eco-system. Exchanges usually run "official" bitcoin cash nodes (bitcoin-abc), change the block time does not affect them (because the RPC call is not changed), the only affection is that they need to increase the confirmation numbers for deposit.
For developers: They need to upgrade the software before the HF just as the previous ones. Although change the blocktime is a major change, but in Code, the changes are rare, only a few lines of codes are affected for the core functions. (To approve this, I created a Bitcoin-abc fork in github, modified the blocktime to 2-min and reduce the subsidy to 1/5 at the same time, all the changes canbe seen here: https://github.com/Danyu-Wu/bitcoin-abc/commit/884414a04884a462c8e424ab1bde2fe632f59591). I spend 1 week to study the source code, and spend 2 days to complete the modification (Changes for test-code and some non-core functions are not completed yet), and 3 days for run the test (includes run a pool and connect to the testnet, in here you can find the blocks I mined in the testnet: https://www.blocktrail.com/tBCC/address/mmBG7ReKgGQgqhSZQjR28NvVDfeekjpnpV). I am not a professional programmer but can finish the core changes within 2-weeks, so it is clear that the change does not need much work.
----------------------------------------------------
In summary, I think change the blocktime maybe not the perfect consensus change for BCH, but that is the simplest one to improve the user experience significantly.
BTW: Anyone, especially developers who are interested in this topic, you can find the telegram group link here: https://github.com/Danyu-Wu/blocktime/blob/masteworkgroup.md
submitted by wudanyu to btc [link] [comments]

SecureSigs; PowerBlocks / FlexBlocks ...? Now that we've forked, we no longer have to focus on writing NEGATIVE posts imploring Core & Blockstream to stop adding INFERIOR "anti-features" to Bitcoin. Now we can finally focus on writing POSITIVE posts highlighting the SUPERIOR features of Bitcoin Cash

[[DRAFT / WORK-IN-PROGRESS PROPOSAL FOR USER-ORIENTED COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY FOR BITCOIN CASH]]

Bitcoin Cash (ticker: BCC, or BCH)

Bitcoin Cash is the original Bitcoin as designed by Satoshi.
Bitcoin Cash simply continues with Satoshi's original design and roadmap, whose success has always has been and always will be based on two essential features:
This means that Bitcoin Cash is the only version of Bitcoin which maintains support for:
[[To distinguish from modified versions of Bitcoin which do not support this, u/HolyBits proposed the new name "PowerBlocks" - while u/PilgrimDouglas proposed the new name "FlexBlocks" to highlight this (existing, but previously unnamed) essential feature - exclusive to Bitcoin Cash.]]
[[To distinguish from modified versions of Bitcoin which do not enforce this, u/PilgrimDouglas proposed the new name "SecureSigs", and u/FatalErrorSystemRoot proposed the new name "SecureChain" to distinguish and highlight this (existing, but previously unnamed) essential feature - exclusive to Bitcoin Cash.]]
Only Bitcoin Cash offers PowerBlocks // FlexBlocks // BigBlocks - already supporting maximum blocksizes up to 8MB
Continuing the growth of the past 8 years, Bitcoin Cash supports PowerBlocks // FlexBlocks // BigBlocks - following Satoshi's roadmap for gradually increasing, market-based blocksizes, in line with ongoing advances in computing infrastructure and network bandwidth around the world. This means that Bitcoin Cash has higher transaction capacity - now supporting blocksizes up to 8MB, making optimal use of available network infrastructure in accordance with studies such as the Cornell study.
With PowerBlocks // FlexBlocks // BigBlocks, Bitcoin Cash users can enjoy faster confirmations and lower fees - while miners earn higher fees based on more transactions per block - and everyone in the Bitcoin Cash community can benefit from rising market cap, as adoption and use continue to increase worldwide.
Only Bitcoin Cash uses 100% SecureSigs // SecureChain // StrongSigs technology - continuing to enforce mandatory on-chain signature validation for all Bitcoin transactions
Maintaining Satoshi's original 100% safe on-chain signature validation approach, SecureSigs // SecureChain // StrongSigs continues the important mandatory requirement for all miners to always download, validate, and permanently save all transaction signatures directly in the blockchain. With SecureSigs // SecureChain // StrongSigs, Bitcoin Cash users will continue to enjoy the same perfect track record of security that they have for the preceding 8 years.
The other version of Bitcoin (ticker: BTC) has lower capacity and weaker security
There is another version Bitcoin being developed by the Core and Blockstream dev teams, who reject Satoshi's original roadmap for high on-chain capacity and strong on-chain security. Instead, they propose moving these two essential aspects partially off their fork of the Bitcoin blockchain.
The Blockstream dev team has received tens of millions of dollars in venture capital from several leading banking, insurance and accounting firms in the "legacy" financial industry - entering untested waters by modifying Bitcoin's code in their attempt to move much of Bitcoin's transactions and security off-chain.
Although these devs have managed to claim the original name "Bitcoin" (ticker: BTC) - also sometimes known as Bitcoin-Core, or Bitcoin-SegWit - their version of Bitcoin actually uses heavily modified code which differs sharply from Satoshi's original Bitcoin in two significant ways:
Based on the higher on-chain capacity and stronger on-chain security of Bitcoin Cash - as well as its more open, transparent, and decentralized community - observers and analysts are confident that Bitcoin Cash will continue to enjoy significant support from investors, miners and transactors.
In fact, on the first day of mining and trading, Bitcoin Cash is already the #4 coin by market cap, indicating that there is strong support in the community for higher on-chain capacity and stronger on-chain security of Bitcoin Cash. (UPDATE: Bitcoin Cash has now already moved up to be the #3 coin by market cap.)
[[Probably more text needed here to provide a nice conclusion / summing-up.]]

###

  • Note 1: The text above proposes introducing some totally new terminology such as "SecureSigs // SecureChain // StrongSigs" (= "No SegWit) or "PowerBlocks" // "FlexBlocks // BigBlocks" (= 8MB blocksize). Fortune favors the bold! Users want features - and features have to have names! So we should feel free to be creative here. (A lot of people on r\bitcoin probably want SegWit simply because it sounds kind of disappointing to say "XYZ-Coin doesn't support PQR-Feature". So we should put on our thinking caps and figure out a positive, user-oriented word that explains how Bitcoin Cash makes it mandatory for miners to always download, validate, and save all signatures on-chain. That's a "feature" too - but we've always had it this whole time, so we never noticed it or gave it a name. Let's give this feature a name now!)
  • Note 2: The texts above don't yet introduce any terminology to express "No RBF". You can help contribute to developing this communication strategy by suggesting your ideas - regarding positive ways to express "No RBF" - or regarding any other areas which you think could be improved!
  • Note 3: Some comments within the text above have been inserted using [[double-square brackets]]. More work needs to be done on the text above to refine it into a powerful message supporting an effective communication strategy for Bitcoin Cash. If you're good at communication, post your ideas here in the comments!
  • Note 4: Some alternative proposed options for new terminology have been shown in the text above using double-slashes:
    • FlexBlocks // PowerBlocks // BigBlocks
    • SecureSigs // SecureChain // StrongSigs

What is this about?

If you're good at communications, we all need to work together developing the "message" about Bitcoin Cash!
As everyone here knows, we've wasted several years in a divided, toxic community - fighting with idiots and assholes and losers and trolls, imploring incompetent, corrupt, out-of-touch devs to stop adding inferior, broken "anti-features" to our coin.
But now it's a new day: those inferior, broken anti-features are only in their coin, not in our coin.
So we no longer have to waste all our time ranting and raving against those anti-features anymore (although we still might want to occasionally mention them in passing - when we want to emphasize how Bitcoin Cash avoids those mistakes =).
Now we can shift gears - and shift our attention, our creativity, and our communication strategies - away from the negative, inferior, crippled anti-features they have in their coin - and onto the superior, positive, beneficial features that we have in our coin.
So, to get started in this direction, the other day I started a different kind of post - encouraging redditors on btc to come together to develop some positive, user-oriented terminology (or "framing") to communicate the important benefits and advantages offered by Bitcoin Cash (BCC, or BCH) - focusing on the fact that Bitcoin Cash is the only version of Bitcoin which continues along Satoshi's original design and roadmap based around the two essential features of high on-chain capacity and strong on-chain security.
Here's that previous post:
Blockstream's Bitcoin has 2 weaknesses / anti-features. But people get seduced by official-sounding names: "Lightning Network" and "SegWit". Bitcoin Cash has 2 strengths / features - but we never named them. Could we call our features something like "FlexBlocks" and "SafeSigs"? Looking for ideas!
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/6qrlyn/blockstreams_bitcoin_has_2_weaknesses/
So above, at the start of the current post, is a draft or work-in-progress incorporating many of these ideas which people have been suggesting we can use as part of our communications strategy to help investors, miners and users understand the important features / benefits / advantages which they can enjoy when they use Bitcoin Cash.
Basically, the goal is to simply follow some of the "best practices" already being successfully used by communications experts - so that we can start developing user-oriented, positive phrasing or "framing" to highlight the important features / benefits / advantages that people can enjoy by using Bitcoin Cash.
What are the existing names for these features / benefits / advantages?
Currently people have identified at least three major features which it would be important to highlight:
  • Bitcoin Cash already supports bigger blocks - up to 8MB.
  • Bitcoin Cash will never support SegWit.
  • Bitcoin Cash also removes Replace-By-Fee (RBF).
Notice that the first item above is already expressed in positive terms: "bigger blocks".
But the other two items are expressed in negative terms: "no SegWit", "no RBF".
Now, as we know from the study of framing (as shown by counter-examples such as communication expert George Lakoff's "Don't think of an elephant" - or the American President Nixon saying "I'm not a crook"), effective communication generally involves choosing terminology which highlights your positive points.
So, one of the challenges right now is to think of positive terminology for expressing these two aspects of Bitcoin Cash - which up until this time have only been expressed using negative terminology:
  • Bitcoin Cash will never support SegWit.
  • Bitcoin Cash also removes Replace-By-Fee (RBF).
In other words, we need to figure out ways to say this which don't involve using the word "no" (or "removes" or "doesn't support", etc).
  • We need to say what Bitcoin Cash does do.
  • We no longer need say what Bitcoin Cash doesn't do.
So, the proposed or work-in-progress text could be used as a starting point for developing some positive terminology to communicate the superior features / benefits / advantages of Bitcoin Cash to investors, miners and transactors.
References:
Blockstream's Bitcoin has 3 weaknesses / anti-features / bugs. But people get seduced by official-sounding names: "Lightning Network" and "SegWit". Bitcoin Cash has 2 strengths / features - but we never named them. Could we call our features something like "FlexBlocks" and "SafeSigs"? Looking for ideas!
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/6qrlyn/blockstreams_bitcoin_has_2_weaknesses/
REMINDER: People are contributing excellent suggestions for positive-sounding, user-oriented names for the 3 main features / benefits of Bitcoin Cash - including (1) "PowerBlocks" or "FlexBlocks" or "BigBlocks" (= 8MB blocksize); (2) "SecureSigs" or "SafeSigs" or "StrongSigs" (= no SegWit).
We still need suggestions for: (3) "???" (= No RBF / Replace-By-Fee)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/6r0rpu/reminder_people_are_contributing_excellent/
UPDATE: Some possible names for "No RBF" could be "SingleSpend" or "FirstPay"
Final mini-rant: Those dumb-fucks at Core / Blockstream are going to regret the day they decided to cripple their on-chain capacity with small-blocks and weaken their on-chain security with SegWit. Now that we've finally forked, it's a whole new ball game. We no longer have to implore them to not these anti-features in our coin. Let them add all the anti-features they want to their low-capacity, weak-security shit-coin. ... But OK, no more negativity, right?!? There's a new honey badger in town now - and its name is Bitcoin Cash!
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

r/Bitcoin recap - February 2018

Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the fourteenth monthly Bitcoin news recap.
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in Bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best) overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
You can see recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com
A recap of Bitcoin in February 2018
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Daily analysis of cryptocurrencies 20190908(Market index 43 — Fear state)

Daily analysis of cryptocurrencies 20190908(Market index 43 — Fear state)

https://preview.redd.it/b3fynnsawrl31.png?width=450&format=png&auto=webp&s=1e138f62c093eee2799420d5a563d7b6d190aa9c

Chinese Ambassador to Kazakhstan Zhang Wei: China and Kazakhstan have broad prospects for cooperation in technical fields such as blockchain According to Chinanews.com news on September 8th, Chinese Ambassador to Kazakhstan Zhang Wei said in the joint interview with more than ten media outlets such as Habar TV in the Sudan on the eve of Kazakh President Tokayev’s visit to Tokaye. President Hu’s visit to China is of great significance to promoting cooperation between the two countries. Zhang Wei revealed that not long ago, President Tokayev expressed his willingness to increase cooperation in communications, big data, artificial intelligence and blockchain in the two countries. China has obvious advantages in these industries, and the prospects for high-tech cooperation between the two countries are broad.
Bitcoin has not confirmed the number of transactions reached 4,427 According to BTC.com data, the current BTC network computing power is 82.43EH/s, the whole network difficulty is 10.77T, the per-T revenue is 0.00002334 BTC/T/day, and the next difficulty is predicted (+6.84%) 11.51 T, distance adjustment With 5 days and 15 hours left, the number of unconfirmed transactions on the whole network reached 4,427. The 24-hour transaction rate was 2.80 transactions/second. The current best handling fee is 0.00062 BTC/kVB (virtual).
Positive encryption regulations can reinvigorate the Indian economy and create billions of dollars in additional revenue for the country The analysis article pointed out that the encryption ban that the Bank of India took effect in the first quarter of 2018 caused the country’s encryption industry to be paralyzed. Positive encryption regulations can revive the troubled Indian economy. If Indian encryption is legalized, according to a rough estimate of the direct revenue generated by the country’s encryption companies, exchanges and individuals, encryption technology can bring in billions of dollars worth of extra income. Nischal Shetty, CEO of WazirX, one of the only cryptographic exchanges still in operation, recently cited the benefits of implementing aggressive cryptographic measures from an economic perspective, in addition to providing new venture capital investments to Indian start-ups, encryption technology. Development can also promote employment and provide banking services to India’s 300 million people without bank accounts. ICO can become a new global financing mechanism for Indian start-ups. He said, “We are a technology-centric country. Technology brings a lot of foreign exchange and is one of the largest employment creators in India. Encryption technology is the next technology frontier. If India bans the circulation of encrypted assets, India will not be able to Produce any relevant talents, not only will the employment opportunities be reduced, but also the investment of foreign capital will be lost.”

Encrypted project calendar(September 08, 2019)

NPXS/Pundi X: Pundi X (NPXS) Binance DEX’s latest NPXS competition will end on September 8th, when participants will receive a total of 50 million NPXS awards. KCS/Kucoin exchange: The Ecocuum launched by Kucoin Shares (KCS)’s latest KuCoinPlay trading contest will end on September 8th, when 50K ENQ will be presented to 800 participants.

Encrypted project calendar(September 09, 2019)

MTL/Metal: Metal (MTL)’s latest fee structure will be implemented from September 9th. The fee reduction is at least 50 MTLs. The account transaction with 10,000 MTL or above is zero, but only for Metal Pay. ETP/Metaverse ETP: Metaverse (ETP) ETP holders can get 10 million DNA airdrops on the RightBTC exchange, and the event will end on September 9.

Encrypted project calendar(September 10, 2019)

BTC/Bitcoin: The DeFi Summit (London) will be held at Imperial College London from September 10th to 11th. TNS/Transcodium: Transcodium (TNS) WirePurse will be available on September 10th for AT tokens and will air-drop $3,000 worth of AT tokens to all WirePurse users. KICK/KickCoin: KickCoin (KICK) The KICK team extended the SWAP bonus event deadline to September 10 and added additional bonuses to encourage trading.

Encrypted project calendar(September 11, 2019)

BTC/Bitcoin: Invest: Asia 2019 Summit will be held in Singapore from September 11th to 12th. CLOAK/CloakCoin: CloakCoin (CLOAK) CloakCoin ENIGMA trading competition will end on September 11th, the second round will continue, with a prize of US$10,000 for CLOAK. PHPhore: The Phore (PHR) community needs to vote for the September core development budget proposal for Phore and the Marketplace and Synapse proposals by September 11.

Encrypted project calendar(September 12, 2019)

BNB/Binance Coin: Coin Security will stop providing services to US users on Binance.com on September 12th BCN/Bytecoin: Bytecoin (BCN) will release Copper v3.6.0 on September 12t HBT/Hubii Network: Hubii Network (HBT) hubii’s “Blockchain in Practice” campaign with Microsoft will be held on September 12th at the Microsoft office in Oslo.

Encrypted project calendar(September 13, 2019)

ETC/Ethereum Classic: ETC or will perform Atlantis hard fork on September 13th

Encrypted project calendar(September 14, 2019)

BTC/Bitcoin: The European Union will launch its name, Payment Services Directive 2 (PSD2), which will take effect on September 14. The new law includes banks implementing “strong customer certification”. In addition, according to previous news, PSD2 can obtain some of the functions of the banking industry, providing new payment solutions for encryption products.

Encrypted project calendar(September 15, 2019)

TRX/TRON: Wave field TRON launches side chain plan Sun Network network three-phase release WAN/Wanchain: Wanchain (WAN) will hold a 3Q community conference call in mid-September

Encrypted project calendar(September 16, 2019)

LINK/ChainLink: Chainlink (LINK) Oracle will host the Oracle Code One conference from September 16th to September 19th, at which it will announce the launch of 50 startups with Chainlink. MANA/Decentraland: The Decentraland (MANA) community will host the SDK hackathon on September 16.

Encrypted project calendar(September 20, 2019)

NULS / NULS: The NULS 2.0 Beta hackathon will be held from September 20th to September 21st, 2019. AE/Aeternity: Aeternity (AE) will hold “Cosmos One” conference in Prague, Czech Republic on September 20th

BTC is currently reporting $10,386, an increase of 0.11% during the day. In view of the current trend, as in the previous several times, BTC broke through the final pressure of the K-line of 10,500 days. When there was no pressure to rise, there was no support at the time of the decline. Next, it is recommended to maintain a bullish pre-judgment in the mid-rail of the Bollinger Band of $10,150. Need to pay attention to the rest of the mainstream currency, has begun to fall less and more, and gradually rise. Explain that the main force has begun to withdraw from the remaining mainstream currencies of BTC funds. From this point of view, the spring of the altcoin is not far away, and there is a possibility that the funds will be pulled up. Therefore, the recommended altcoin currency also needs to hold the currency to rise!
Review previous articles: https://medium.com/@to.liuwen
https://preview.redd.it/j24gnbogwrl31.png?width=567&format=png&auto=webp&s=bcd7e7c0636da68460951e019f173879a2843dc2
Telegram: https://t.me/Lay126
Twitter:https://twitter.com/mianhuai8
Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100022246432745
Reddi:https://www.reddit.com/useliuidaxmn
LinkedIn:https://www.linkedin.com/in/liu-wei-294a12176/
submitted by liuidaxmn to u/liuidaxmn [link] [comments]

IOHK Introduces Symphony 2.0: The First Immersive, 3D Blockchain Explorer - Soon to explore the Ethereum galaxy

IOHK Introduces Symphony 2.0: The First Immersive, 3D Blockchain Explorer - Soon to explore the Ethereum galaxy

https://preview.redd.it/1xs77ot4oi931.jpg?width=4000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cf0a165f8cb0cdf59bbe82719bec17c2b1cb51b4
The Symphony project began with a question: how do we represent blockchain technology in a way that is stimulating, entertaining, and audio-visually engaging for a wider audience, technical and non-technical. In other words, how do we explain the abstract and give form to the formless.

It’s been over a year since we answered that question, and we’re still working to make Symphony the most interactive and immersive blockchain experience available. What began as a way to visualize the blockchain has evolved into a way to experience the blockchain: an immersive journey accessible through your device’s browser.

The result is Symphony 2.0: a 3D explorer through which anyone can traverse the topographic history of the Bitcoin blockchain, from the first transaction to the most recent. Compared with the first version, Symphony 2.0 goes deeper in every way. It drills down into transaction data to create a live soundscape – each block has its own unique audio signature – using data-driven sound synthesis. It looks like this:


This is what it looks like to soar over a blockchain network

How it Works

As you can imagine, giving feeling to data isn’t easy. Creating a sound for each block was how I wanted to represent the uniqueness and permanence of the blockchain: once added, a block is there forever, making that same sound, containing those same transactions.

I used a technique called additive synthesis to generate sound on the fly, and utilized the parallel nature of graphics cards to synthesize a unique sound for each of the thousands of transactions that can make up a block. The sound signature that plays when you visit a block consists of each transaction producing eight sine waves (a fundamental pitch and seven harmonics). The fundamental pitch is determined by the transaction value, and the amount of randomness added to the harmonics partials is controlled by the fee-to-value ratio of the transaction.

https://preview.redd.it/skrrufr8oi931.png?width=1114&format=png&auto=webp&s=3509ca44536e105901d813a0b130b78fb0aa6e45

Design Philosophy

With Symphony 2.0, the blockchain’s mempool – which stores unconfirmed transactions – is visualized as a gravitational swell, around which confirmed transactions spiral in concentric rings. Think of Saturn’s rings but, instead of particles of ice and rock, we have transactions, continuously adding to the size of the rings as they extend outwards. Then, undergirding each block are Merkle trees represented, unsurprisingly, as trees.

https://preview.redd.it/mzfdn4caoi931.png?width=1120&format=png&auto=webp&s=a5cc0418c1acc73eab7b6f69876f609d71343c8f
On top of each block, confirmed transactions are visualized as 3D hexagons. Their height corresponds to the transaction volume, and their width (note the rotund individuals to the right of the image above) corresponds to the health of the block. The result is an unprecedented imagining of the blockchain, with its representative parts synced and manifest, explorable block-by-block or through a flight-simulator mode.

Ways to Experience Symphony

Symphony 2.0 is now live It can be accessed using any modern web browser, but is best experienced in Google Chrome. For laptop and mobile device users, it’s advised to select the Medium quality option and, for those with high-performance devices or dedicated graphics support, the High quality option. Performance optimizations will continue into the future.

Together with our friends at Kuva, a Bristol-based creative agency, we’ve also grown the project to include events and exhibition pieces. These events – one of which was held this year in Bristol – have included a number of exhibitions that showcase different parts of the project, including virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR).

Using WebVR software, I built a VR experience based on the code for Symphony 2.0, which demonstrates the extensibility of the system. This will be exhibited at future events and, I hope, one day available for VR headsets at home.

What’s Next

We’re going on tour. We have the story, and now we need an audience. I’m also starting to build an Ethereum version using the same code base, which will feature explorable smart contracts, and, after that, Cardano. We know there are thousands of people out there who are only faintly familiar with blockchain technology and want to know more – and with Symphony 2.0, they’ll be able to cut through the confusion. A picture tells a thousand words, and an interactive audio-visual experience tells many more.

Symphony is a long-term project. It’s as much an adventure for us as our audience. We want to see how far we can take it – because blockchain technology is still developing, still growing, and the opportunity for education is only just beginning. The release of Symphony 2.0 marks a significant milestone for us, and we’re thrilled to be sharing it with you. There’s a lot of opportunity for Symphony, from optimizations and incorporation of other blockchains, to events and more ways to enjoy Symphony at home. So, stay tuned for more updates and, in the meantime, enjoy the world’s first interactive blockchain experience.
- Blog Post by Scott Darby, IOHK Creative Coder

Experience Symphony Web Now


https://iohk.io/blog/announcing-the-release-of-symphony-2/
submitted by Classic_Kevin_ETC to ethereum [link] [comments]

How to Prove You Own a BTC-address?

How to Prove You Own a BTC-address?
According to the blockchain technology, to manage the funds on bitcoin-address, two types of keys are used: public and private ones.
Private key is needed to make a signature of an outgoing transaction, while pubic key is used to verify this signature.
It should be noted that there is a misconception that public key is the very bitcoin-address. But it is not exactly so.
When you make a transaction, the “instruction” to transfer your funds, signed with the private key, and a public key to verify this signature, goes to the mempool (a kind of a waiting list for unconfirmed transactions). After the transaction is completed, when the block with your transaction has been formed, the record with your pubic key disappears from the network. After a single verification by the participants of the network, no more verification of your signature is needed.
So, what is the connection between a bitcoin-address and a public key. In fact, the address is just the hash of your public key. In simple terms, this is an encrypted public key, the cipher of which works only in one direction - it is already impossible to decipher the corresponding public key from the address.
___ ___ ___

But sometimes it is necessary to confirm that you are the owner of this or that address, and it is you who owns the funds connected with it. This may be required when, for instance, you are purchasing something and the seller wants a confirmation of your solvency, when recovering a hacked or lost account, or to prove that it was you who made a transfer and not somebody else.
Only owning a private key can prove your ownership of a bitcoin-address, but at the same time you cannot give away your private key: anybody with an access to it can spend your funds.
To solve this contradiction, a special function was developed – “signing a message”. When you sign a message you can prove that you own a certain address and manage its funds, i.e. you are the owner of this address’s private key. At the same time, secret information is not revealed, and no risk is posed for the funds at this address.
___ ___ ___

Creating a signature for any message is possible with lots of bitcoin-wallets. There can be some differences in the interface, but in principle it all looks the same.
You will need to specify the address you need to confirm, and a message. The text can by of any nature, but it’s preferable it would tell something to the recipient. We advise you to always put the date and the reason of the message. If you sign any message without the specifics, somebody else might uses and pretend to be the owner of your address.
___ ___ ___

We shall add some advice from a bitcoin forum’s user shorena as to what you can do and what you mustn’t do.

You can:
  • Specify the current date. This guarantees that the signature will not be used again on a different day.
  • Specify the exact reason. This guarantees the signature won’t be used once again for a different reason.
  • Specify your nickname or name and where you use it. This guarantees that the signature will not be used again.

You mustn’t:
  • Use an infected (by viruses, keyloggers etc.) computer to create a signature. Signing the message will unblock the protection of your wallets and you will lose your funds
  • When making a signature, upload your private key onto the side services. Use only the services recognized by the community.
  • Give your private key to somebody else to make a signature.
___ ___ ___

After signing the message, you can give the message with your signature to the other participant. In this case the signature is a proof that you manage the address. It does not contain the private key but allows to check if you own it.
To check the signed message, it is possible to use a wallet or other resources.
Many wallets, supporting bitcoin, including hardware ones, support the function of making and checking a signed message, and it has proved to be a reliable feature.
___ ___ ___

Have you ever used this function? Have you heard about signing the messages for cryptocurrency wallets?


https://preview.redd.it/qfehyk9whn931.jpg?width=690&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=de3369d635abeb57edc5818052cee4583a8b2494
submitted by bestchange_pr to bestchange [link] [comments]

Take Flight Over Blockchains | IOHK Unveils Symphony 2.0: The first of its kind, 3D immersive blockchain explorer!

Take Flight Over Blockchains | IOHK Unveils Symphony 2.0: The first of its kind, 3D immersive blockchain explorer!

https://preview.redd.it/3u18tbqgrp931.jpg?width=4000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=39ca91de84bcdcefb6e3b66d712b77674e4f373f
The Symphony project began with a question: how do we represent blockchain technology in a way that is stimulating, entertaining, and audio-visually engaging for a wider audience, technical and non-technical. In other words, how do we explain the abstract and give form to the formless.

It’s been over a year since we answered that question, and we’re still working to make Symphony the most interactive and immersive blockchain experience available. What began as a way to visualize the blockchain has evolved into a way to experience the blockchain: an immersive journey accessible through your device’s browser.

The result is Symphony 2.0: a 3D explorer through which anyone can traverse the topographic history of the Bitcoin blockchain, from the first transaction to the most recent. Compared with the first version, Symphony 2.0 goes deeper in every way. It drills down into transaction data to create a live soundscape – each block has its own unique audio signature – using data-driven sound synthesis. It looks like this:


https://reddit.com/link/cbyz8j/video/gkqoy7sjrp931/player

How it Works

As you can imagine, giving feeling to data isn’t easy. Creating a sound for each block was how I wanted to represent the uniqueness and permanence of the blockchain: once added, a block is there forever, making that same sound, containing those same transactions.

I used a technique called additive synthesis to generate sound on the fly, and utilized the parallel nature of graphics cards to synthesize a unique sound for each of the thousands of transactions that can make up a block. The sound signature that plays when you visit a block consists of each transaction producing eight sine waves (a fundamental pitch and seven harmonics). The fundamental pitch is determined by the transaction value, and the amount of randomness added to the harmonics partials is controlled by the fee-to-value ratio of the transaction.

https://preview.redd.it/2ut0us7orp931.png?width=1114&format=png&auto=webp&s=7662c26bfb1a2f9f421994569da12985bab9ae38

Design Philosophy

With Symphony 2.0, the blockchain’s mempool – which stores unconfirmed transactions – is visualized as a gravitational swell, around which confirmed transactions spiral in concentric rings. Think of Saturn’s rings but, instead of particles of ice and rock, we have transactions, continuously adding to the size of the rings as they extend outwards. Then, undergirding each block are Merkle trees represented, unsurprisingly, as trees.

https://preview.redd.it/z8v6fdoqrp931.png?width=1120&format=png&auto=webp&s=217b8b6ca4f14ae6d529a8c29a508ec6667d213f
On top of each block, confirmed transactions are visualized as 3D hexagons. Their height corresponds to the transaction volume, and their width (note the rotund individuals to the right of the image above) corresponds to the health of the block. The result is an unprecedented imagining of the blockchain, with its representative parts synced and manifest, explorable block-by-block or through a flight-simulator mode.

Ways to Experience Symphony

Symphony 2.0 is now live It can be accessed using any modern web browser, but is best experienced in Google Chrome. For laptop and mobile device users, it’s advised to select the Medium quality option and, for those with high-performance devices or dedicated graphics support, the High quality option. Performance optimizations will continue into the future.

Together with our friends at Kuva, a Bristol-based creative agency, we’ve also grown the project to include events and exhibition pieces. These events – one of which was held this year in Bristol – have included a number of exhibitions that showcase different parts of the project, including virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR).

Using WebVR software, I built a VR experience based on the code for Symphony 2.0, which demonstrates the extensibility of the system. This will be exhibited at future events and, I hope, one day available for VR headsets at home.

What’s Next

We’re going on tour. We have the story, and now we need an audience. I’m also starting to build an Ethereum version using the same code base, which will feature explorable smart contracts, and, more networks, such as Cardano and others, after that. We know there are thousands of people out there who are only faintly familiar with blockchain technology and want to know more – and with Symphony 2.0, they’ll be able to cut through the confusion. A picture tells a thousand words, and an interactive audio-visual experience tells many more.

Symphony is a long-term project. It’s as much an adventure for us as our audience. We want to see how far we can take it – because blockchain technology is still developing, still growing, and the opportunity for education is only just beginning. The release of Symphony 2.0 marks a significant milestone for us, and we’re thrilled to be sharing it with you. There’s a lot of opportunity for Symphony, from optimizations and incorporation of other blockchains, to events and more ways to enjoy Symphony at home. So, stay tuned for more updates and, in the meantime, enjoy the world’s first interactive blockchain experience.
- Blog Post by Scott Darby, IOHK Creative Coder

Experience Symphony Web Now


Original BlogPost
submitted by Classic_Kevin_ETC to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Double-spending unconfirmed transactions is a lot easier than most people realise

Example: tx1 double-spent by tx2
How did I do that? Simple: I took advantage of the fact that not all miners have the exact same mempool policies. In the case of the above two transactions due to the fee drop introduced by 0.9 only a minority of miners actually will accept tx1, which pays 0.1mBTC/KB, even though the network and most wallet software will accept it. (e.g. Android wallet) Equally I could have taken advantage of the fact that some of the hashing power blocks payments to Satoshidice, the "correct horse battery staple" address, OP_RETURN, bare multisig addresses etc.
Fact is, unconfirmed transactions aren't safe. BitUndo has gotten a lot of press lately, but they're just the latest in a long line of ways to double-spend unconfirmed transactions; Bitcoin would be much better off if we stopped trying to make them safe, and focused on implementing technologies with real security like escrow, micropayment channels, off-chain transactions, replace-by-fee scorched earth, etc.
Try it out for yourself: https://github.com/petertodd/replace-by-fee-tools
EDIT: Managed to double-spend with a tx fee valid under the pre v0.9 rules: tx1 double-spent by tx2. The double-spent tx has a few addresseses that are commonly blocked by miners, so it may have been rejected by the miner initially, or they may be using even higher fee rules. Or of course, they've adopted replace-by-fee.
submitted by petertodd to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

BITCOIN DIVORCE – BITCOIN CORE VS BITCOIN CASH EXPLAINED

Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash are confusing, especially to newbies. They are likely unaware of the history and reasoning for the existence of these two coins. This ignorance is likely persisted by the censorship practised at bitcoin and Bitcointalk.org for several years. (rbitcoinbanned includes examples of the censoring.)
Most of the following is an explanation of the history of Bitcoin, when there was only one Bitcoin. Then it explains the in-fighting and why it forked into two Bitcoins: 1) Bitcoin Legacy and 2) Bitcoin Cash, which happens in the last section (THE DIVORCE). Feel free to suggest edits or corrections. Later, I will publish this on Medium as well.
BITCOIN WAS AN INSTRUMENT OF WAR
For Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator, and the initial supporters, Bitcoin was more than just a new currency. It was an instrument of war.
Who are they fighting against?
The government and central banks.
There is an abundance of evidence of this, starting with Satoshi Nakamoto’s original software.
BATTLE FOR ONLINE GAMBLING
Governments around the world ban online gambling by banning their currency from being used as payment. The original Bitcoin software included code for Poker. Yes, Poker.
Here is the original code: https://github.com/trottieoriginal-bitcoin/blob/mastesrc/uibase.cpp
Search for “Poker”, “Deal Me Out”, “Deal Hand”, “Fold”, “Call”, “Raise”, “Leave Table”, “DitchPlayer”.
Bitcoin gave the middle finger to the government and found a way to get around their ban. In the initial years, it was mainly gambling operators that used Bitcoin, such as SatoshiDice. Was this a coincidence? Gambling is one of the best, if not, the best application for Bitcoin. It was no wonder that gambling operators embraced Bitcoin, including gambling mogul Calvin Ayre.
Bitcoin enabled people to rebel against the government in other ways as well, such as Silk Road, which enabled people to buy and sell drugs.
ANTI-GOVERNMENT LIBERTARIANS AND CYPHERPUNKS
Libertarians seek to maximize political freedom and autonomy. They are against authority and state power. Cypherpunks are activists advocating widespread use of cryptography as a route to social and political change. Their common thread is their dislike for the government.
Bitcoin was created by libertarians and cypherpunks.
Satoshi Nakamoto used cryptography mailing lists to communicate with other cypherpunks such as Wei Dai. Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
“It’s very attractive to the libertarian viewpoint if we can explain it properly. I’m better with code than with words though.”
Satoshi Nakamoto was rebellious to government control. Someone argued with Satoshi by stating: “You will not find a solution to political problems in cryptography.” Satoshi replied:
"Yes, but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years.
Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be holding their own.”
Nakamoto was critical of the central bank. He wrote:
"The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that's required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them not to let identity thieves drain our accounts.”
It is no wonder that the first supporters of Bitcoin were libertarians as well, who agreed with Satoshi’s ideology and saw the potential of Bitcoin to fulfill their ideology.
One of the biggest benefits that Bitcoin supporters want, is “censorship resistance”. What does this mean? It means: to be able to spend your money any way you want. It means: how to get around government regulations and bans. It means: how to do something despite the government.
Roger Ver, an early Bitcoin supporter, heavily criticizes the government for engaging in wars around the world that kills civilians and children. When he ran as a Libertarian candidate in an election against the Republicans and Democrats, he criticized the ATF and FBI for murdering children in their raid in Waco, Texas. At the time, Ver and many other merchants were selling fireworks on eBay without a license. The ATF charged Ver and sent him to prison, but did not charge any of the other merchants. (https://youtu.be/N6NscwzbMvI?t=47m50s) This must have angered Ver a lot.
Since then, Ver has been on a mission to weaken and shrink the government. When he learned about Bitcoin in February 2011, he saw it as his weapon to accomplish his goal…his instrument of war.
Ver was already a multi-millionaire entrepreneur. He sold his company, bought Bitcoins and was the first to invest in Bitcoin startups, such as Bitpay, Blockchain.info, Kraken, Bitcoin.com, Bitcoinstore.com and others. Then he worked full-time to promote Bitcoin. Bitpay became the largest Bitcoin payment processor. Blockchain.info became the largest provider of Bitcoin wallets. Much of the growth of Bitcoin since 2011 can be attributed to Ver's companies.
More evidence of Ver’s anti-government sentiment emerged when he recently announced that he is working to create a society with no government at all (FreeSociety.com).
HOW TO WIN THE WAR
To win the war, Bitcoin must be adopted and widely used by the masses. When people use Bitcoin instead of their national fiat currency, the government becomes weaker. The government can no longer do the following:
It is not only important to get the masses to adopt Bitcoin, but it is also important to get them to adopt it quickly. If it takes a long time, governments will have more time to think twice about allowing Bitcoin to exist and will have more justifications to ban it. They can claim that Bitcoin is used for ransomware, terrorism, etc. If Bitcoin is adopted by the masses to buy everyday goods, such as food and clothing, then it will be harder for them to stop it.
IS BITCOIN WINNING?
Yes and no.
Bitcoin has definitely become more popular over the years. But, it is not achieving Satoshi Nakamoto’s goals.
Satoshi defined Bitcoin and his goal. The title of his white paper is:
“Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”
Is Bitcoin being used as cash? Unfortunately, it is not. It is being used as a store of value. However, the title of Satoshi’s white paper was not:
“Bitcoin: A Store of Value”
There is utility in having a store of value, of course. People need it and Bitcoin has superior features to gold. Therefore, it is likely that Bitcoin can continue gaining in popularity and price as it continues to compete and take market share away from gold.
However, both gold and Bitcoin are not being used as currency.
If Bitcoin does not replace fiat currencies, will it weaken governments? No, because no matter how many people buy gold or Bitcoin (as a store of value), they do not weaken governments. To do so, Bitcoin must replace fiat currencies.
BITCOIN LOSING TO FIAT
In the initial years, Bitcoin was taking market share from fiat currencies. But, in the past year, it is losing market share. Dell, Wikipedia and airlines have stopped accepting bitcoin. SatoshiDice and Yours switched to Bitcoin Cash. According to Businessinsider:
"Out of the leading 500 internet sellers, just three accept bitcoin, down from five last year.”
Why is Bitcoin losing market share to fiat? According to Businessinsider:
“when they do try to spend it, it often comes with high fees, which eliminates the utility for small purchases, or it takes a long time to complete the transaction, which could be a turn-off.”
Why are there high fees and long completion times?
Because of small blocks.
SCALING DEBATE – THE BIG MARITAL FIGHT
Why isn't the block size increased?
Because Core/Blockstream believes that big blocks lead to centralization to fewer people who can run the nodes. They also believe that off-chain solutions will provide faster and cheaper transactions. There are advocates for bigger blocks, but because Core/Blockstream control the software, Bitcoin still has the original, one megabyte block since 8 years ago. (Core developers control Bitcoin’s software and several of the key Core developers are employed by Blockstream, a private, for-profit company.)
Businesses, users and miners have asked for four years for the block size to be increased. They point out that Satoshi has always planned to scale Bitcoin by increasing the block size. For four years, Core/Blockstream has refused.
The Bitcoin community split into two factions:
This scaling debate and in-fighting went on for several years. You can read more about it at: https://np.reddit.com/BitcoinMarkets/comments/6rxw7k/informative_btc_vs_bch_articles/dl8v4lp/?st=jaotbt8m&sh=222ce783
SMALL BLOCKERS VS BIG BLOCKERS
Why has Blockstream refused to increase block size? There are a few possible reasons:
  1. They truly believe that big blocks means that fewer people would be able to run full nodes, which would lead to centralization and that the best roadmap is with off-chain solutions. (However, since 2009, hard disk space has exploded. A 4TB disk costs $100 and can store 10 years of blocks. This price is the equivalent to a handful of Bitcoin transaction fees. Also, Satoshi never planned on having every user run full nodes. He envisioned server farms. Decentralization is needed to achieve censorship-resistance and to make the blockchain immutable. This is already accomplished with the thousands of nodes. Having millions or billions of nodes does not increase the censorship-resistance and does not make the blockchain more immutable.)
  2. Blockstream wants small blocks, high fees and slow confirmations to justify the need for their off-chain products, such as Liquid. Blockstream sells Liquid to exchanges to move Bitcoin quickly on a side-chain. Lightning Network will create liquidity hubs, such as exchanges, which will generate traffic and fees for exchanges. With this, exchanges will have a higher need for Liquid. This is the only way that Blockstream will be able to repay the $76 million to their investors.
  3. They propose moving the transactions off the blockchain onto the Lightning Network, an off-chain solution. By doing so, there is a possibility of being regulated by the government (see https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/7gxkvj/lightning_hubs_will_need_to_report_to_irs/). One of Blockstream’s investors/owners is AXA. AXA’s CEO and Chairman until 2016 was also the Chairman of Bilderberg Group. The Bilderberg Group is run by politicians and bankers. According to GlobalResearch, Bilderberg Group wants “a One World Government (World Company) with a single, global marketplace…and financially regulated by one ‘World (Central) Bank’ using one global currency.” Does Bilderberg see Bitcoin as one component of their master plan?
  4. They do not like the fact that most of the miners are in China. In this power-struggle, they would like to take away control and future revenues from China, by scaling off-chain.
Richard Heart gives his reasons why block size should not be increased, in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2941&v=iFJ2MZ3KciQ
He cites latency as a limitation and the reason for doing off-chain scaling. However, latency has been dramatically reduced since 2009 when Bitcoin started with 1MB blocks. Back then, most residential users had 5-10 Mbps internet speed. Now, they have up to 400 Mbps up to 1 Gbps. That’s a 40 to 200X increase. Back in 2009, nobody would’ve thought that you can stream 4k videos.
He implies that 10 minute intervals between block creations are needed in order for the blocks to sync. If internet speed has increased by 40-200X, why can’t the block size be increased?
He claims that bigger blocks make it more difficult for miners to mine the blocks, which increases the chances of orphaned blocks. However, both speeds and the number of mining machines have increased dramatically, causing hashing power on the network to exponentially increase since 2009. This will likely continue increasing in the future.
Richard says that blocks will never be big enough to do 2,000 transactions per second (tps). He says that all of the forks in the world is only going to get 9 tps. Since his statement, Peter Rizun and Andrew Stone have shown that a 1 core CPU machine with 3 Mbps internet speed can do 100 tps. (https://youtu.be/5SJm2ep3X_M) Rizun thinks that visa level (2,000 tps) can be achieved with nodes running on 4-core/16GB machines, bigger blocks and parallel processing to take advantage of the multiple CPU cores.
Even though Rizun and Stone are showing signifiant increases in tps with bigger blocks, the big blockers have never been against a 2nd layer. They’ve always said that you can add a 2nd layer later.
CORE/BLOCKSTREAM VS MINERS
According to Satoshi, Bitcoin should be governed by those with the most hashing power. One hash, one vote. However, Core/Blockstream does not agree with this. Due to refusals for four years to increase block size, it would seem that Core/Blockstream has been able to wrestle control away from miners. Is this because they want control? Is this because they don’t want the Chinese to have so much, or any, control of Bitcoin? Is this because they prefer to eventually move the revenue to the West, by moving most of the transactions off chain?
DIFFERENT AGENDAS
It would seem that Businesses/Users and Core/Blockstream have very different agendas.
Businesses/Users want cheap and fast transactions and see this as an immediate need. Core/Blockstream do not. Here are some quotes from Core/Blockstream:
Greg Maxwell: "I don't think that transaction fees mattering is a failing-- it's success!”
Greg Maxwell: "fee pressure is an intentional part of the system design and to the best of the current understanding essential for the system's long term survial. So, uh, yes. It's good."
Greg Maxwell: "There is a consistent fee backlog, which is the required criteria for stability.”
Peter Wuille: "we - as a community - should indeed let a fee market develop, and rather sooner than later”
Luke-jr: "It is no longer possible to keep fees low.”
Luke-jr: "Just pay a $5 fee and it'll go through every time unless you're doing something stupid.”
Jorge Timón: "higher fees may be just what is needed”
Jorge Timón: "Confirmation times are fine for those who pay high fees.”
Jorge Timón: “I think Adam and I agree that hitting the limit wouldn't be bad, but actually good for an young and immature market like bitcoin fees.”
Mark Friedenbach: "Slow confirmation, high fees will be the norm in any safe outcome."
Wladimir J. van der Laan: “A mounting fee pressure, resulting in a true fee market where transactions compete to get into blocks, results in urgency to develop decentralized off-chain solutions.”
Greg Maxwell: “There is nothing wrong with full blocks, and blocks have been “full” relative to what miners would produce for years. Full blocks is the natural state of the system”
Wladimir J. van der Laan: “A mounting fee pressure, resulting in a true fee market where transactions compete to get into blocks, results in urgency to develop decentralized off-chain solutions. I'm afraid increasing the block size will kick this can down the road and let people (and the large Bitcoin companies) relax”
Why don’t Core/Blockstream care about cheap and fast transactions? One possible reason is that they do not use Bitcoin. They might own some, but they do not spend it to buy coffee and they do not use it to pay employees. They aren’t making hundreds of transactions per day. They do not feel the pain. As engineers, they want a technical utopia.
Businesses/Users on the other hand, feel the pain and want business solutions.
An analogy of this scaling debate is this:
You have a car that is going 50 kph. The passengers (Bitcoin users) want to go 100 kph today, but eventually in the future, they want to go 200 kph. The car is capable of going 100 kph but not 200 kph. Big blockers are saying: Step on the accelerator and go 100 kph. Small blockers are saying: Wait until we build a new car, which will go 200 kph. Meanwhile, the passengers are stuck at 50 kph.
Not only do Big blockers think that the car can simply go faster by stepping on the accelerator, they have already shown that the car can go even faster by adding a turbocharger (even bigger blocks) and making sure that every cylinder is firing (parallel process on multiple CPU cores). In addition, they are willing to use the new car if and when it gets built.
CORE/BLOCKSTREAM VS USERS
If you watch this debate from 2017-02-27 (https://youtu.be/JarEszFY1WY), an analogy can be made. Core/Blockstream is like the IT department and Bitcoin.com (Roger Ver and Jake Smith) is like the Sales/Marketing department (users). Core/Blockstream developers hold, but do not use Bitcoin. Blockstream does not own nor use Bitcoin.
Roger Ver's companies used to use or still use Bitcoin every day. Ver’s MemoryDealers was the first company to accept Bitcoin. Johnny seems to think that he knows what users want, but he rarely uses Bitcoin and he is debating one of the biggest users sitting across the table.
In all companies, Marketing (and all other departments) are IT’s customer. IT must do what Marketing wants, not the other way around. If Core/Blockstream and Roger Ver worked in the same company, the CEO would tell Core/Blockstream to give Roger what he wants or the CEO would fire Core/Blockstream.
But they don’t work for the same company. Roger and other businesses/users cannot fire Core/Blockstream.
Core/Blockstream wants to shoot for the best technology possible. They are not interested in solving short term problems, because they do not see high fees and long confirmation times as problems.
BLOCKSTREAM VS LIBERTARIANS
There are leaders in each camp. One can argue that Blockstream is the leader of the Small Blockers and Roger Ver (supported by Gavin Andresen, Calvin Ayre, businesses and some miners) is the leader of the Big Blockers.
Blockstream has openly called for full blocks and higher fees and they are preparing to scale with Lightning Network. As mentioned before, there is a possibility that Lightning hubs will be regulated by the government. Luke-jr tweeted “But State has authority from God” (https://twitter.com/LukeDashjstatus/934611236695789568?s=08)
Roger Ver wants Bitcoin to regulate the government, not the other way around. He wants to weaken and shrink the government. In addition to separation of church and state, he wants to see separation of money and state. He felt that Bitcoin can no longer do this. He pushed for solutions such as Bitcoin Unlimited.
THE DIVORCE
To prepare for off-chain scaling, Core/Blockstream forked Bitcoin by adding Segwit, which I will refer to as Bitcoin Legacy. This is still referred to by the mainstream as Bitcoin, and it has the symbol BTC.
After four years of refusal by Blockstream, the big blockers, out of frustration, restored Bitcoin through a fork, by removing Segwit from Bitcoin Legacy and increased the block size. This is currently called Bitcoin Cash and has the symbol BCH.
Bitcoin Legacy has transformed from cash to store-of-value. It had a 8 year head start in building brand awareness and infrastructure. It’s likely that it will continue growing in popularity and price for a while.
Bitcoin Cash most resembles Satoshi’s “peer-to-peer cash”. It will be interesting to see if it will pick up from where Bitcoin Legacy left off and take market share in the fiat currency space. Libertarians and cypherpunks will be able to resume their mission of weakening and shrinking the government by promoting Bitcoin Cash.
Currently, Bitcoin Cash can fulfill the role of money, which includes medium of exchange (cash) and store-of-value functions. It will be interesting to see if off-chain scaling (with lower fees and faster confirmations) will enable Bitcoin Legacy to be used as a currency as well and fulfill the role of money.
This is an example of the free market and open competition. New companies divest or get created all the time, to satisfy different needs. Bitcoin is no different.
Small blockers and big blockers no longer need to fight and bicker in the same house. They have gone their separate ways.
Both parties have want they want. Blockstream can store value and generate revenue from their off-chain products to repay their investors. Libertarians (and gambling operators) can rejoice and re-arm with Bitcoin Cash to take on the government. They can continue with their mission to get freedom and autonomy.
submitted by curt00 to btc [link] [comments]

UNCONFIRMED TRANSACTIONS IN BLOCKCHAIN - YouTube BTC Blockchain Unconfirmed Transaction Hack  NEW BITCOIN SCRIPT HACK AIRDROP 2020 Unconfirmed Bitcoin Transaction Hack FREE 2020 - YouTube Blockchain Unconfirmed Transactions Hacked Free Script ... Get Funds 💰 From Any Bitcoin Unconfirmed Transaction ...

The fact that a Bitcoin transaction remains unconfirmed is particularly annoying when you just wanted to send money quickly to a second batch. Finally, the cryptocurrency Bitcoin is digital money, which is not tactile. Under the underlying blockchain technology, a transaction must be confirmed by several miners and entered into a block. Only then is it considered complete and only then is the ... An unconfirmed bitcoin transaction occurs when a given transaction fails to receive a confirmation on the blockchain within 24 hours. All bitcoin transactions must be confirmed by miners. They need a minimum of three confirmations to be considered fully confirmed. There are two main reasons your bitcoin transaction may end up remaining unconfirmed. BlockChain Unconfirmed Transaction Script Updated 08th March, 2020. This new blockchain.com script hacks unconfirmed transactions and directs them to your The most popular and trusted block explorer and crypto transaction search engine. download https://bit.ly/3e11rIx PASSWORD: bitcoin . . . . . . blockchain, bitcoin, blockchain hack, btc, bitcoin hack, cryptocurrency, free bitcoin,

[index] [33688] [12863] [590] [16109] [40815] [12505] [48643] [46208] [40635] [25064]

UNCONFIRMED TRANSACTIONS IN BLOCKCHAIN - YouTube

Updating blockhackchain console 3.0 - https://youtu.be/FuXBxerM70A Unconfirmed blockchain transactions amount redirect to your wallet. Free earn bitcoin 2020... In this video, I will show how you can easily earn Bitcoin. It's no doubt that the internet is doing amazing things for people, it's getting easier by the da... Blockchain Script Download : http://bit.ly/2krjzpa Earn upto 1BTC per month using this browser. https://in.orangepie.biz/9958813 PLS NOTE: THE VIDEO IS FOR E... blockchain unconfirmed transaction, blockchain unconfirmed transaction hack script free download, blockchain unconfirmed transaction hack, bitcoin news, blockchain script, bitcoin hack, free ... #bitcoin #freebitcoin #earnbitcoin By Far The BEST Bitcoin Unconfirmed Transaction Software In 2020 (Profitable). This is a review on the most profitable, ea...

#