Free bitcoin generator 2019 PC Verison Work miner 2019 ...
Free bitcoin generator 2019 PC Verison Work miner 2019 ...
Cómo instalar GUIMiner en Windows - GanaBitcoins
Bitcoin Core version 0.15.0.1 released
Bitcoin Hash Miner Pro 2020 - Home bitcoinadder
Catálogo P2P › Bitcoin (BTC)
Is it possible to objectively discuss things without getting dragged to the "Dragons Den"?
The computer science debates about the best ways to scale Bitcoin are far too important for us to take “sides”. “Beating” the other guy doesn’t serve any of us, and it doesn’t serve Bitcoin. In these discussions we need to be as sure as possible that we are not just winning an argument, or making talking points but that we are factually correct. One thing everyone should agree on is the need for truthful and factual statements when discussing these important issues. Unfortunately, the Bitcoin community learned some very bad habits from the world of politics. [Disclaimer: I do not work for Blockstream and I never have, just as I did not work for Roger Ver the other day when I defended him against a similar baseless attack about Mt.. Gox https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/6846wo/message_to_rogedgvnrqk/ ] For example, it is difficult to have any discussion in Bitcoin without someone bringing up the “Dragon’s Den”. "Dragon’s Den" is brought up as an argument point often by everyone from major minors, to CEOs and analysts. But what do we really know about “Dragon’s Den”? What is the full body of evidence regarding the claims about Dragons Den? Well, it’s pretty simple: 1) One lone LN developer claimed that there was a secret channel used for trolling 2) Someone posted a screenshot showing the existence of the slack channel and some people chatting in it What is absent from this evidence:
There seems to be no evidence that the channel was actually used for the purpose of organizing trolling campaigns (yes, the channel exists)
There seems to be no evidence that a significant number of core developers actually participated in this channel (one core contributor, BTCDrak runs the channel, apparently the name was a play on his own name)
There seems to be no evidence that Blockstream participated in this channel in any meaningful way especially for the purpose of organized trolling
So really, we have CEOs, miners and thousands of people who care passionately about Bitcoin using “Dragon’s Den” as a talking point when really – – – the entire thesis about dragons den comes down to “a guy said”. One doesn’t even have to be critical of the developer who claimed its existence to have doubts about the story. If you look carefully, Joseph Poon never even claimed to have first-hand knowledge about dragons den being used for trolling – he didn’t even mention that he ever visited the channel. One guy saying something doesn’t make it true. One doesn't even have to think that Joseph is a bad actor (and I don't) maybe he was misinformed, didn't think clearly before making his statement, had a misunderstanding or exaggerated. There was a Reddit post asking him to clarify but it doesn't seem he did. So what is Dragon’s Den really? Honestly my best educated guess is that the slack channel simply existed as a place for like-minded individuals to discuss topics and opinions they share an interest in. After it was revealed to the public, the channel was opened to a number of interested/concerned community members to review including me. This was the first time I knew about or entered the channel. What I saw was pretty similar to the regular Slack. Bias against BU? Of course? Bias in favor of the core roadmap? Sure? An organized trolling campaign? Doubtful. My guess is that the channel was similar before it became public. Now it is possible that, as part of an elaborate ruse, participants in the channel have gone and created a new double secret channel where the real trolling is being organized and are still participating in the existing “Dragon’s Den” channel as some sort of theater to throw people off their trail and fool someone like me into posting this. Maybe, maybe, maybe But I doubt it. Occams Razor is a good explanation – the most likely explanation is that it simply people who are like-minded gathering together Just as the most likely explanation for a lot of behavior in Bitcoin is the simple one. I don't think Gavin is in the CIA or Roger is secretly trying to harm Bitcoin or Blockstream is involved in some conspiracy to destroy Bitcoin with AXA and I don't think Bitmain purposely intended to shut down miners (but the risk was still real) and I don't think Greg Maxwell works for the CIA either. People have human faults, they mess up, they are self interested etc. Occasionally they will be behind some elaborate ruse, but usually behavior comes down to just people being people. What about the trolling? Again absence any evidence I think the simplest explanation is that like-minded people hanging around in the channel are likely to react in similar manners to various news and tweets. It’s most likely like “Hey did you see this ridiculous argument John Doe just tweeted?" and then a number of like-minded people make comments on that post. Could this be considered organized trolling? Maybe. Same way posting a tweet on one or the other Reddit sub will cause a dozen people to comment...this seems like organized trolling. Having been attacked, criticized and trolled by many of the same people who are very active in that channel I know how it feels: even half a dozen people can easily make you feel overwhelmed by attackers. Between misconceptions, logical fallacies, name-calling, retweets, reposts and comments for multiple people you can feel like Boromir in the first Lord of the Rings movie with arrow after arrow shot at you. But really – this is just part of the way the Internet works. I once even found myself banned from the entire Slack in question. I annoyed people with my continual calls for compromise as well as occasionally defending people from exactly the type of unfair or inaccurate attack I’m talking about here. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed, I put my differences aside with the people at in the channel and since then have had a lot of productive and mutually respectful discussions about this important technology. But core runs this! This is the thing, they really don’t. I tried to get this point across in a recent blog post. Down With Bitcoin Core (as a noun used to describe people) https://medium.com/@brucefenton/down-with-bitcoin-core-as-a-noun-used-to-describe-people-9d76d4b3cbef I know it’s frustrating, and I used to feel the same way as many BU supporters in thinking that “core” was one monolithic, like-minded entity. ** It’s really not. It's just not factual to look at it this way** *Only after a lot of time spending a lot of time meeting with and discussing issues with numerous core and non-core developers did I come to this opinion. * I now think that it is only fair for us to judge individual people on the individual actions that they take. Not actions taken by a group. Worse yet: Some core developers even use this word “core” as a noun to describe people when it suits them. This is equally wrong. Individual people and only individual people should be held accountable for the actions that they actually taken the words that they actually say. If we do that, it’s harder to argue. Groups are easy to hate. It’s very easy to discuss to prescribe opinions or characteristics on “Republicans” or “liberals” or "core" or "btc". If you are running for office, it’s a great idea to use these types of terms: they seek to divide and drive wedges. The world of politics is not that simple: on major issues ranging from the drug war to war, foreign policy and taxes there are vast differences between people who carry the various political labels. An open source project, particularly one as diverse as Bitcoin, has much more nuance than this even. There is definitely no universal “core” opinion. “Core developers” include a wide variety of people: Gavin Andresen, Satoshi Nakamoto, Greg Maxwell, Matt Corallo, Alex Marcos, Peter Todd, Vladimir and many others. It just isn’t accurate or fair to put all people in the same category. What happens if we do start holding individual people accountable for their actions? Well, for one thing, it makes it a lot harder to argue against broad ideas such as “core believes X” or “core failed to X”. If someone claims that the “Dragon’s Den” is some sort of effort by “core”, then the first question should be“Who specifically do you mean by “core””? As far as I can tell the only contributor to the core software project was active in that particular channel is the moderator. In fact, it does not seem likely that even more than a couple other actual core developers ever even visited the channel – – let alone used it or engaged in any sort of organized trolling behavior from it. How many core devs total on the high end even visited? Five? So instead of saying "Dragons Den is a core project to organize trolling" why don't we say "these five people organize trolling"? Well, because it's too damn hard. It's EASY to blame some nameless faceless group, but when you name specific people you usually have to back it up better, so those five people accused would (rightfully) respond "Huh? What evidence do you have of this?" Bram Cohen was caught in this exact situation. Just by being in this now infamous chat channel it was assumed he was a participant in trolling. Why?Because a guy said that the channel exists for trolling If someone has visions of Vladimir or Greg Maxwell sitting around this particular Slack channel planning troll campaigns – – the facts and evidence simply don’t show this to be reflective of reality. So what should we do next? This argument isn’t going to be solved by one post. But what we can all do is work together to discuss things in his fair and accurate of a way as possible. This means holding actual people responsible for actual actions they do. If you don't like the core roadmap, debate it with Nullc, if you don't agree with the people who signed it, take it up with them. If you don't think the peer review process is fair and objective, contribute technically to the discussion. If you don't like the "Dragons Den" then take it up with specific people. What this really ends up looking like is that instead of being able to say "Dragons Den is a massive troll army run by core" it ends up more like "BTCDrak and MrHodl and Alp are in a channel and I don't like what they tweeted". That second statement doesn't have the bite of the first....but it's true. Working for better standards also means we should really avoid claims about either "side" unless they are backed by evidence and relevant to the discussion. In fact, we shouldn’t even be having “sides” at all. We are here to change the world. No one likes the bickering. Many don't participate...but almost all of us support it at some point. Whether it's up-voting a divisive post, sharing a meme attacking the other guys or using terms designed to place people in camps, we contribute even when we don't mean to. What would happen if we all decided to no longer participate in division? What if we down voted every comment that attacks individuals or which is divisive and we upvoted everything positive? What if we kept scientific debate more scientific? Every piece of data and information in this discussion should be analyzed independently. Independent of the source ended up dependent of what our own motivations or narrative might be. Anytime we engage in using terms designed to “beat” the other side red division, we don’t win paragraph we win and Bitcoin wins by us all working together to be as accurate and fair as possible.
Final version 1.3.0 of the core software was released bringing all the enhancements reported last month to the rest of the community. The groundwork for SPV (simplified payment verification) is complete, another reduction of fees is being deployed, and performance stepped up once again with a 50% reduction in startup time, 20% increased sync speed and more than 3x faster peer delivery of block headers (a key update for SPV). Decrediton's integrations of SPV and Politeia are open for testing by experienced users. Read the full release notes and get the downloads on GitHub. As always, don't forget to verify signatures. dcrd: completed several steps towards multipeer downloads, improved introduction to the software in the main README, continued porting cleanups and refactoring from upstream btcd. Currently in review are initial release of smart fee estimator and a change to UTXO set semantics. The latter is a large and important change that provides simpler handling, and resolves various issues with the previous approach. A lot of testing and careful review is needed so help is welcome. Educational series for new Decred developers by @matheusd added two episodes: 02 Simnet Setup shows how to automate simnet management with tmux and 03 Miner Reward Invalidation explains block validity rules. Finally, a pull request template with a list of checks was added to help guide the contributors to dcrd. dcrwallet: bugfixes and RPC improvements to support desktop and mobile wallets. Developers are welcome to comment on this idea to derive stakepool keys from the HD wallet seed. This would eliminate the need to backup and restore redeem scripts, thus greatly improving wallet UX. (missed in July issue) Decrediton: bugfixes, refactoring to make the sync process more robust, new loading animations, design polishing. Politeia: multiple improvements to the CLI client (security conscious users with more funds at risk might prefer CLI) and security hardening. A feature to deprecate or timeout proposals was identified as necessary for initial release and the work started. A privacy enhancement to not leak metadata of ticket holders was merged. Android: update from @collins: "Second test release for dcrandroid is out. Major bugs have been fixed since last test. Latest code from SPV sync has been integrated. Once again, bug reports are welcome and issues can be opened on GitHub". Ask in #dev room for the APK to join testing. A new security page was added that allows one to validate addresses and to sign/verify messages, similar to Decrediton's Security Center. Work on translations is beginning. Overall the app is quite stable and accepting more testers. Next milestone is getting the test app on the app store. iOS: the app started accepting testers last week. @macsleven: "the test version of Decred Wallet for iOS is available, we have a link for installing the app but the builds currently require your UDID. Contact either @macsleven or @raedah with your UDID if you would like to help test.". Nearest goal is to make the app crash free. Both mobile apps received new design themes. dcrdata: v3.0 was released for mainnet! Highlights: charts, "merged debits" view, agendas page, Insight API support, side chain tracking, Go 1.11 support with module builds, numerous backend improvements. Full release notes here. This release featured 9 contributors and development lead @chappjc noted: "This collaboration with @raedahgroup on our own block explorer and web API for @decredproject has been super productive.". Up next is supporting dynamic page widths site wide and deploying new visual blocks home page. Trezor: proof of concept implementation for Trezor Model T firmware is in the works (previous work was for Model One). Ticket splitting: updated to use Go modules and added simnet support, several fixes. docs: beginner's guide overhaul, multiple fixes and cleanups. decred.org: added 3rd party wallets, removed inactive PoW pools and removed web wallet. @Richard-Red is building a curated list of Decred-related GitHub repositories. Welcome to new people contributing for the first time: @klebe, @s_ben, @victorguedes, and PrimeDominus! Dev activity stats for September: 219 active PRs, 197 commits, 28.7k added and 18.8k deleted lines spread across 6 repositories. Contributions came from 4-10 developers per repository. (chart)
Hashrate: started and ended the month around 75 PH/s, hitting a low of 60.5 and a new high of 110 PH/s. BeePool is again the leader with their share varying between 23-54%, followed by F2Pool 13-30%, Coinmine 4-6% and Luxor 3-5%. As in previous months, there were multiple spikes of unidentified hashrate. Staking: 30-day average ticket price is 98 DCR (+2.4). The price varied between 95.7 and 101.9 DCR. Locked DCR amount was 3.86-3.96 million DCR, or 45.7-46.5% of the supply. Nodes: there are 201 public listening nodes and 325 normal nodes per dcred.eu. Version distribution: 5% are v1.4.0(pre) dev builds (+3%), 30% on v1.3.0 (+25%), 42% on v1.2.0 (-20%), 15% on v1.1.2 (-7%), 6% on v1.1.0. More than 76% of nodes run v1.2.0 and higher and therefore support client filters. Data as of Oct 1.
Obelisk posted two updates on their mailing list. 70% of Batch 1 units are shipped, an extensive user guide is available, Obelisk Scanner application was released that allows one to automatically update firmware. First firmware update was released and bumped SC1 hashrate by 10-20%, added new pools and fixed multiple bugs. Next update will focus on DCR1. It is worth a special mention that the firmware source code is now open! Let us hope more manufacturers will follow this example. A few details about Whatsminer surfaced this month. The manufacturer is MicroBT, also known as Bitwei and commonly misspelled as Bitewei. Pangolinminer is a reseller, and the model name is Whatsminer D1. Bitmain has finally entered Decred ASIC space with their Antminer DR3. Hash rate is 7.8 TH/s while pulling 1410 W, at the price of $673. These specs mean it has the best GH/W and GH/USD of currently sold miners until the Whatsminer or others come out, although its GH/USD of 11.6 already competes with Whatsminer's 10.5. Discussed on Reddit and bitcointalk, unboxing video here.
@matheusd started tests on testnet several months ago. I contacted him so we could integrate with the pool in June this year. We set up the machine in July and bought the first split ticket on mainnet, using the decredbrasil pool, on July 19. It was voted on July 30. After this first vote on mainnet, we opened the tests to selected users (with more technical background) on the pool. In August we opened the tests to everyone, and would call people who want to join to the #ticket_splitting channel, or to our own Slack (in Portuguese, so mostly Brazilian users). We have 28 split tickets already voted, and 16 are live. So little more than 40 split tickets total were bought on decredbrasil pool. (@girino in #pos-voting)
KuCoin exchange listed DCBTC and DCETH pairs. To celebrate their anniversary they had a 99% trading fees discount on DCR pairs for 2 weeks. Three more wallets integrated Decred in September:
Atomic desktop wallet added Decred in version 0.1.31. The team answered many questions on Reddit.
AnyBit wallet added Decred. It features built-in price and news tracking. Notably, the source code is open for their Android and iOS wallets.
Coboadded Decred support into their Android and iOS wallets.
ChangeNow announced Decred addition to their Android app that allows accountless swaps between 150+ assets. Coinbase launched informational asset pages for top 50 coins by market cap, including Decred. First the pages started showing in the Coinbase app for a small group of testers, and later the web price dashboard went live.
The birth of a Brazilian girl was registered on the Decred blockchain using OriginalMy, a blockchain proof of authenticity services provider. Read the full story in Portuguese and in English.
Advertising report for September is ready. Next month the graphics for all the ads will be changing.
Marketing might seem quiet right now, but a ton is actually going on behind the scenes to put the right foundation in place for the future. Discovery data are being analyzed to generate a positioning strategy, as well as a messaging hierarchy that can guide how to talk about Decred. This will all be agreed upon via consensus of the community in the work channels, and materials will be distributed. Next, work is being done to identify the right PR partner to help with media relations, media training, and coordination at events. While all of this is coming up to speed, we believe the website needs a refresher reflecting the soon to be agreed upon messaging, plus a more intuitive architecture to make it easier to navigate. (@Dustorf)
Raedah Group went on the streets of Portland, USA with a pretty blue tent. (photos)
Meetup at Binzantin Cafe in Taipei, Taiwan. @morphymore: "There were 20-ish attendees, and about half of them have joined the Chinese FB group. Most of them don't hear about Decred before, but have expressed the interest in learning more about it after the event. Overall, it's a good exposure for Decred in the Taiwan community.". A report with photos was posted on Facebook, more photos are here and here.
@joshuam made a Decred Jacket appearance at Singapore Grand Prix. (photos)
NewTech PDX meetup in Portland, USA. Raedah Group presented Decred and reported "lots of new converts". (photos)
North Shore Bitcoin & Blockchain in Glenview, USA. @dustorf gave a five minute overview of Decred and noted: "There were only about 25 people, but about 1/3 of them were aware of Decred prior. (...) Our simple presence and explanation of the project moved opinion from 'another shitcoin they sold after mining' to 'an interesting and viable project worthy of further investigation'.". (photos: 12)
Bitcoin Meetup CDMX in Mexico City on Oct 6. @elian will be talking about Decred at the oldest Bitcoin meetup in Mexico.
SF Blockchain Week in San Francisco, USA on Oct 9. @lukebp will discuss DPoS vs PoS on a panel 9:30a-10:15a at the Titans of Tech Stage, Hilton Union Square.
Decred Meetup in Casablanca, Morocco on Oct 27. @butterfly will host the event and talk about Decred in French.
Texas Bitcoin Conference Austin, USA on Oct 27-28. @BAB: "The great thing about this is that it will also be a Decred Summit. We will have half of the conference dedicated to Decred topics, updates, etc."
Websummit in Lisbon, Portugal on Nov 5-8. @moo31337 will be on a panel discussing "2018: A Rollercoaster Year for Cryptocurrencies"
We'll begin shortly reviewing conferences and events planned for the first half of 2019. Highlights are sure to include The North American Bitcoin Conference in Miami (Jan 16-18) and Consensus in NYC (May 14-16). If you have suggestions of events or conferences Decred should attend, please share them in #event_planning. In 2019, we would like to expand our presence in Europe, Asia, and South America, and we're looking for community members to help identify and staff those events. (@Dustorf)
August issue of Decred Journal was translated to Russian. Many thanks to @DZ! Rency cryptocurrency ratings published a report on Decred and incorporated a lot of feedback from the community on Reddit. September issue of Chinese CCID ratings was published (snapshot), Decred is still at the bottom. Videos:
The underbelly of blockchain Governance - fiat licensing and our code with Marco Peerboom and Chris DeRose (youtube, tweet, decred, missed in August issue) Insightful dialogue about men's underwear, licenses, subtleties of GPL, BSD wars, tiling window managers and much more.
Introduction to Decred (Korean, youtube) @Killawhale collected a lot of feedback from the community and produced this video to spread the word in Korea.
Perspectives on Governance from Nathan Wilcox, Jonathan Zeppettini, Vitalik Buterin (z.cash)
Decred - an example of governance (Portuguese, youtube)
Decred, the crypto that wants to compete with Bitcoin (French, youtube)
Exodus.io Live with Marco from Decred! (youtube) Marco joins Exodus.io to discuss what makes DCR an asset that will stand the test of time.
Building Decred With Systems Development Lead Marco Peereboom - Governance, Politeia, Lightning (youtube) Topics: early days, Politeia, the structure of Decred, dcrtime, Lightning Network, attracting users and developers, future plans (DEX, Schnorr signatures, privacy, DAEs).
Decentralized autonomous funding of blockchain projects by @Richard-Red (medium, discussion on decred and dashpay)
The trouble with infrastructure, "thin" protocols in particular, is that someone has to build them at a cost. e.g. LN takes a ton of work, doesn't necessarily generate value itself, but it magnifies the value of BTC or whatever coin that uses it. I see the DEX in a similar light - whoever creates it is not going to make a bunch of money from it, but it will magnify the value of the underlying asset(s) that end up having a deep order book on the DEX. (@jy-p in #dex)
Twitter: why decentralized governance and funding are necessary for network survival and the power of controlling the narrative; learning about governance more broadly by watching its evolution in cryptocurrency space, importance of community consensus and communications infrastructure. Reddit: yet another strong pitch by @solar; question about buyer protections; dcrtime internals; a proposal to sponsor hoodies in the University of Cape Town; Lightning Network support for altcoins. Chats: skills to operate a stakepool; voting details: 2 of 3 votes can approve a block, what votes really approve are regular tx, etc; scriptless script atomic swaps using Schnorr adaptor signatures; dev dashboard, choosing work, people do best when working on what interests them most; opportunities for governments and enterprise for anchoring legal data to blockchain; terminology: DAO vs DAE; human-friendly payments, sharing xpub vs payment protocols; funding btcsuite development; Politeia vote types: approval vote, sentiment vote and a defund vote, also linking proposals and financial statements; algo trading and programming languages (yes, on #trading!); alternative implementation, C/C++/Go/Rust; HFTs, algo trading, fake volume and slippage; offline wallets, usb/write-only media/optical scanners vs auditing traffic between dcrd and dcrwallet; Proof of Activity did not inspire Decred but spurred Decred to get moving, Wikipedia page hurdles; how stakeholders could veto blocks; how many votes are needed to approve a proposal; why Decrediton uses Electron; CVE-2018-17144 and over-dependence on single Bitcoin implementation, btcsuite, fuzz testing; tracking proposal progress after voting and funding; why the wallet does not store the seed at all; power connectors, electricity, wiring and fire safety; reasonable spendings from project fund; ways to measure sync progress better than block height; using Politeia without email address; concurrency in Go, locks vs channels. #support is not often mentioned, but it must be noted that every day on this channel people get high quality support. (@bee: To my surprise, even those poor souls running Windows 10. My greatest respect to the support team!)
In September DCR was trading in the range of USD 34-45 / BTC 0.0054-0.0063. On Sep 6, DCR revisited the bottom of USD 34 / BTC 0.0054 when BTC quickly dropped from USD 7,300 to 6,400. On Sep 14, a small price rise coincided with both the start of KuCoin trading and hashrate spike to 104 PH/s. Looking at coinmarketcap charts, the trading volume is a bit lower than in July and August. As of Oct 4, Decred is #18 by the number of daily transactions with 3,200 tx, and #9 by the USD value of daily issuance with $230k. (source: onchainfx) Interesting observation by @ImacallyouJawdy: while we sit at 2018 price lows the amount locked in tickets is testing 2018 high.
ASIC for Lyra2REv2 was spotted on the web. Vertcoin team is preparing a new PoW algorithm. This would be the 3rd fork after two previous forks to change the algorithm in 2014 and 2015. A report titled The Positive Externalities of Bitcoin Mining discusses the benefits of PoW mining that are often overlooked by the critics of its energy use. A Brief Study of Cryptonetwork Forks by Alex Evans of Placeholder studies the behavior of users, developers and miners after the fork, and makes the cases that it is hard for child chains to attract users and developers from their parent chains. New research on private atomic swaps: the paper "Anonymous Atomic Swaps Using Homomorphic Hashing" attempts to break the public link between two transactions. (bitcointalk, decred) On Sep 18 Poloniex announced delisting of 8 more assets. That day they took a 12-80% dive showing their dependence on this one exchange. Circle introduced USDC markets on Poloniex: "USDC is a fully collateralized US dollar stablecoin using the ERC-20 standard that provides detailed financial and operational transparency, operates within the regulated framework of US money transmission laws, and is reinforced by established banking partners and auditors.". Coinbase announced new asset listing process and is accepting submissions on their listing portal. (decred) The New York State Office of the Attorney General posted a study of 13 exchanges that contains many insights. A critical vulnerability was discovered and fixed in Bitcoin Core. Few days later a full disclosure was posted revealing the severity of the bug. In a bitcointalk thread btcd was called 'amateur' despite not being vulnerable, and some Core developers voiced their concerns about multiple implementations. The Bitcoin Unlimited developer who found the bug shared his perspective in a blog post. Decred's vision so far is that more full node implementations is a strength, just like for any Internet protocol.
About This Issue
This is the 6th issue of Decred Journal. It is mirrored on GitHub, Medium and Reddit. Past issues are available here. Most information from third parties is relayed directly from source after a minimal sanity check. The authors of Decred Journal have no ability to verify all claims. Please beware of scams and do your own research. Feedback is appreciated: please comment on Reddit, GitHub or #writers_room on Matrix or Slack. Contributions are also welcome: some areas are adding content, pre-release review or translations to other languages. Credits (Slack names, alphabetical order): bee, Dustorf, jz, Haon, oregonisaac, raedah and Richard-Red.
I dont think anyone other [than] conspiracy theorists even accepts that "blockstream core" exists! blockstream has 1.5x full time developers working on bitcoin ...
Here are some facts supporting the idea Blockstream and Core are in bed with each other and can be regarded together as "Blockstream Core": Core developers founded Blockstream
Blockstream was founded in 2014 by Bitcoin Core developers Gregory Maxwell, Dr. Pieter Wuille, Matt Corallo, Jorge Timón and Mark Friedenbach, as well as several non-Bitcoin Core developers including hashcash inventor Dr. Adam Back and venture capitalist Austin Hill. (source)
Also Luke Dashjr source The Core devs are still listed as part of Blockstream's team. At least 10 Core devs work for Blockstream (or 9 if you exclude Adam Back - should we?)
Gregory Maxwell, 2. Matt Corallo, 3. Jorge Timon, 4. Mark Friedenbach, 5. Patrick Strateman, 6. Warren Togami, 7. Adam Back, 8. Pieter Wuille, 9. Gregory Sanders, 10. Glenn Willen Edit: 11. Luke Dashjr
Sources: Mike Hearn and Aaron van Wirdum, see also Blockstream. Segwit Core's contentious addition to Bitcoin, Segwit, is the baby of a Blockstream employee, Pieter Wuille: Blockstream are vocal in their advocacy of Segwit adoption. The Hong Kong Agreement The Hong Kong roundtable agreement was intended to prevent miners forking to Bitcoin Classic and ensure the adoption of Segwit. Several Blockstream personnel signed, but as Core members. Except Adam, who it is widely understood wished to sign as "individual", but changed this to "Blockstream" at the miners' insistence, the miners clearly regarding Blockstream itself as party to the agreement and underlining the common perception that Blockstream has significant influence over the development of Core code and that the two are intertwined. Incidentally, anyone know who paid Adam Back's and the Core developers' expenses? Discussion It seems to me the facts above strongly suggest there is enough of a connection between Blockstream and Core that it is perfectly justifiable to regard them for practical purposes as "Blockstream Core". Adam's statement that Blockstream has 1.5x full time developers working on bitcoin may or may not be true in some narrow sense, but when 9 or 10 Core devs work for Blockstream his statement is hardly full and frank disclosure. It smacks of trying to hide something: what is his game? Perhaps he is afraid that if everyone realises "Blockstream Core" truly describes reality then everyone will also realise Core and its reference client may have been captured for Blockstream's private profit? Anyway, do you have any more facts or observations? For example, do Core devs have Blockstream shares or options on shares? What influence does Blockstream have on Core and vice versa and how is that influence exercised? And do you agree with Adam that the idea of "Blockstream Core" is just a conspiracy theory? Edit: Some previous COI discussion: https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/46que7/blockstream_meet_the_team/ Edit 2:Commits in the last year (source): Blockstream: Greg Maxwell: 46; Jorge Timon: 17; Pieter Wuille: 163; Mark Friedenbach: 0; Patrick Strateman: 31; Warren Togami: 6; Adam Back: 0; Greg Sanders: 32; Glenn Willen: 0 Total commits for listed Blockstream developers: 295 Other: Wladimir Van Der Laan: 210; Marco Falke: 170; Corey Fields: 152; Jonas Schnelli: 87; Suhas Daftuar: 73; Alex Morcos: 65; fanquake: 56; Pavel Janik: 45 Total commits for listed non-Blockstream developers: 858
Note: New Reddit look may not highlight links. See old look here. A copy is hosted on GitHub for better reading experience. Check it out, contains photo of the month! Also on Medium
dcrd: Significant optimization in signature hash calculation, bloom filters support was removed, 2x faster startup thanks to in-memory full block index, multipeer work advancing, stronger protection against majority hashpower attacks. Additionally, code refactoring and cleanup, code and test infrastructure improvements. In dcrd and dcrwallet developers have been experimenting with new modular dependency and versioning schemes using vgo. @orthomind is seeking feedback for his work on reproducible builds. Decrediton: 1.2.1 bugfix release, work on SPV has started, chart additions are in progress. Further simplification of the staking process is in the pipeline (slack). Politeia: new command line tool to interact with Politeia API, general development is ongoing. Help with testing will soon be welcome: this issue sets out a test plan, join #politeia to follow progress and participate in testing. dcrdata: work ongoing on improved design, adding more charts and improving Insight API support. Android: design work advancing. Decred's own DNS seeder (dcrseeder) was released. It is written in Go and it properly supports service bit filtering, which will allow SPV nodes to find full nodes that support compact filters. Ticket splitting service by @matheusd entered beta and demonstrated an 11-way split on mainnet. Help with testing is much appreciated, please join #ticket_splitting to participate in splits, but check this doc to learn about the risks. Reddit discussion here. Trezor support is expected to land in their next firmware update. Decred is now supported by Riemann, a toolbox from James Prestwich to construct transactions for many UTXO-based chains from human-readable strings. Atomic swap with Ethereum on testnet was demonstrated at Blockspot Conference LATAM. Two new faces were added to contributors page. Dev activity stats for May: 238 active PRs, 195 master commits, 32,831 added and 22,280 deleted lines spread across 8 repositories. Contributions came from 4-10 developers per repository. (chart)
Hashrate: rapid growth from ~4,000 TH/s at the beginning of the month to ~15,000 at the end with new all time high of 17,949. Interesting dynamic in hashrate distribution across mining pools: coinmine.pl share went down from 55% to 25% while F2Pool up from 2% to 44%. [Note: as of June 6, the hashrate continues to rise and has already passed 22,000 TH/s] Staking: 30-day average ticket price is 91.3 DCR (+0.8), stake participation is 46.9% (+0.8%) with 3.68 million DCR locked (+0.15). Min price was 85.56. On May 11 ticket price surged to 96.99, staying elevated for longer than usual after such a pump. Locked DCR peaked at 47.17%. jet_user on reddit suggested that the DCR for these tickets likely came from a miner with significant hashrate. Nodes: there are 226 public listening and 405 normal nodes per dcred.eu. Version distribution: 45% on v1.2.0 (up from 24% last month), 39% on v1.1.2, 15% on v1.1.0 and 1% running outdaded versions.
Obelisk team posted an update. Current hashrate estimate of DCR1 is 1200 GH/s at 500 W and may still change. The chips came back at 40% the speed of the simulated results, it is still unknown why. Batch 1 units may get delayed 1-2 weeks past June 30. See discussions on decred and on siacoin. @SiaBillionaire estimated that 7940 DCR1 units were sold in Batches 1-5, while Lynmar13 shared his projections of DCR1 profitability (reddit). A new Chinese miner for pre-order was noticed by our Telegram group. Woodpecker WB2 specs 1.5 TH/s at 1200 W, costs 15,000 CNY (~2,340 USD) and the initial 150 units are expected to ship on Aug 15. (pow8.com – translated) Another new miner is iBelink DSM6T: 6 TH/s at 2100 W costing $6,300 (ibelink.co). Shipping starts from June 5. Some concerns and links were posted in these twothreads.
A new mining pool is available now: altpool.net. It uses PPLNS model and takes 1% fee. Another infrastructure addition is tokensmart.io, a newly audited stake pool with 0.8% fee. There are a total of 14 stake pools now. Exchange integrations:
Upbit added DCKRW and DCUSDT pairs. A user reported that DCR deposits and withdrawals are now available.
CoinEx announced the launch of DCBTC and DCBCH pairs.
Bleutrade added DCUSDT pair. Note their reply to our tweet. It was the first exchange to list Decred minutes after launch.
Brazilian exchange OmniTradeadded DCBRL fiat pair following a poll. Worth noting that it is one of the first to integrate Trezor sign-in.
There are reports that DCR was added to Abucoins and Tor Exchange but we don't know much about them.
OpenBazaar released an update that allows one to trade cryptocurrencies, including DCR. @i2Rav from i2trading is now offering two sided OTC market liquidity on DCUSD in #trading channel. Paytomat, payments solution for point of sale and e-commerce, integrated Decred. (missed in April issue) CoinPayments, a payment processor supporting Decred, developed an integration with @Shopify that allows connected merchants to accept cryptocurrencies in exchange for goods.
michae2xl: Voto Legal: CEO Thiago Rondon of Appcívico, has already been contacted by 800 politicians and negotiations have started with four pre-candidates for the presidency (slack, source tweet)
Blockfolio rolled out Signal Beta with Decred in the list. Users who own or watch a coin will automatically receive updates pushed by project teams. Nice to see this Journal made it to the screenshot! Placeholder Ventures announced that Decred is their first public investment. Their Investment Thesis is a clear and well researched overview of Decred. Among other great points it noted the less obvious benefit of not doing an ICO:
By choosing not to pre-sell coins to speculators, the financial rewards from Decred’s growth most favor those who work for the network.
One project that stands out at #Consensus2018 is @decredproject. Not annoying. Real tech. Humble team. #BUIDL is strong with them. (@PallerJohn)
Token Summit in New York, USA. @cburniske and @jmonegro from Placeholder talked "Governance and Cryptoeconomics" and spoke highly of Decred. (twitter coverage: 12, video, video (from 32 min)) Campus Party in Bahia, Brazil. João Ferreira aka @girino and Gabriel @Rhama were introducing Decred, talking about governance and teaching to perform atomic swaps. (photos) Decred was introduced to the delegates from Shanghai's Caohejing Hi-Tech Park, organized by @ybfventures. Second Decred meetup in Hangzhou, China. (photos) Madison Blockchain in Madison, USA. "Lots of in-depth questions. The Q&A lasted longer than the presentation!". (photo) Blockspot Conference Latam in Sao Paulo, Brazil. (photos: 1, 2) Upcoming events:
The Long-Term Bullish Case for Decred by Ben Davidow (medium.com)
Hardware Companies Are Launching Dedicated ASIC Miners for Decred (btcmanager.com)
Iterative Capital partner Chris Dannen and journalist Ben Schiller speak with Marco and Jonathan from Decred at Consensus 2018 (soundcloud)
Decred Review: What is DCR, the Decred Community & Possible Challenges by BitBoy Crypto (youtube)
Decred Founder: Bitcoin Paved Way, Phase 2 Will Shock You! (Marco Peereboom) by Pure Blockchain Wealth (youtube)
Decred & Blocknet: Revolutionary governance for every community feat. JZ at Consensus 2018 (youtube)
Decred coin - Will it be better than Bitcoin? by Bitassist (youtube)
Community stats: Twitter 39,118 (+742), Reddit 8,167 (+277), Slack 5,658 (+160). Difference is between May 5 and May 31. Reddit highlights: transparent up/down voting on Politeia, combining LN and atomic swaps, minimum viable superorganism, the controversial debate on Decred contractor model (people wondered about true motives behind the thread), tx size and fees discussion, hard moderation case, impact of ASICs on price, another "Why Decred?" thread with another excellent pitch by solar, fee analysis showing how ticket price algorithm change was controversial with ~100x cut in miner profits, impact of ticket splitting on ticket price, recommendations on promoting Decred, security against double spends and custom voting policies. @R3VoLuT1OneR posted a preview of a proposal from his company for Decred to offer scholarships for students. dcrtrader gained a couple of new moderators, weekly automatic threads were reconfigured to monthly and empty threads were removed. Currently most trading talk happens on #trading and some leaks to decred. A separate trading sub offers some advantages: unlimited trading talk, broad range of allowed topics, free speech and transparent moderation, in addition to standard reddit threaded discussion, permanent history and search. Forum: potential social attacks on Decred. Slack: the #governance channel created last month has seen many intelligent conversations on topics including: finite attention of decision makers, why stakeholders can make good decisions (opposed to a common narrative than only developers are capable of making good decisions), proposal funding and contractor pre-qualification, Cardano and Dash treasuries, quadratic voting, equality of outcome vs equality of opportunity, and much more. One particularly important issue being discussed is the growing number of posts arguing that on-chain governance and coin voting is bad. Just a few examples from Twitter: Decred is solving an imagined problem (decent response by @jm_buirski), we convince ourselves that we need governance and ticket price algo vote was not controversial, on-chain governance hurts node operators and it is too early for it, it robs node operators of their role, crypto risks being captured by the wealthy, it is a huge threat to the whole public blockchain space, coin holders should not own the blockchain. Some responses were posted here and here on Twitter, as well as this article by Noah Pierau.
The month of May has seen Decred earn some much deserved attention in the markets. DCR started the month around 0.009 BTC and finished around 0.0125 with interim high of 0.0165 on Bittrex. In USD terms it started around $81 and finished around $92, temporarily rising to $118. During a period in which most altcoins suffered, Decred has performed well; rising from rank #45 to #30 on Coinmarketcap. The addition of a much awaited KRW pair on Upbit saw the price briefly double on some exchanges. This pair opens up direct DCR to fiat trading in one of the largest cryptocurrency markets in the world. An update from @i2Rav:
We have begun trading DCR in large volume daily. The interest around DCR has really started to grow in terms of OTC quote requests. More and more customers are asking about trading it.
Like in previous month, Decred scores high by "% down from ATH" indicator being #2 on onchainfx as of June 6.
David Vorick (@taek) published lots of insights into the world of ASIC manufacturing (reddit). Bitmain replied. Bitmain released an ASIC for Equihash (archived), an algorithm thought to be somewhat ASIC-resistant 2 years ago. Threepure PoWcoins were attacked this month, one attempting to be ASIC resistant. This shows the importance of Decred's PoS layer that exerts control over miners and allows Decred to welcome ASIC miners for more PoW security without sacrificing sovereignty to them. Upbit was raided over suspected fraud and put under investigation. Following news reported no illicit activity was found and suggested and raid was premature and damaged trust in local exchanges. Circle, the new owner of Poloniex, announced a USD-backed stablecoin and Bitmain partnership. The plan is to make USDC available as a primary market on Poloniex. More details in the FAQ. Poloniex announced lower trading fees. Bittrex plans to offer USD trading pairs. @sumiflow made good progress on correcting Decred market cap on several sites:
speaking of market cap, I got it corrected on coingecko, cryptocompare, and worldcoinindex onchainfx, livecoinwatch, and cryptoindex.co said they would update it about a month ago but haven't yet I messaged coinlib.io today but haven't got a response yet coinmarketcap refused to correct it until they can verify certain funds have moved from dev wallets which is most likely forever unknowable (slack)
About This Issue
Some source links point to Slack messages. Although Slack hides history older than ~5 days, you can read individual messages if you paste the message link into chat with yourself. Digging the full conversation is hard but possible. The history of all channels bridged to Matrix is saved in Matrix. Therefore it is possible to dig history in Matrix if you know the timestamp of the first message. Slack links encode the timestamp: https://decred.slack.com/archives/C5H9Z63AA/p1525528370000062 => 1525528370 => 2018-05-05 13:52:50. Most information from third parties is relayed directly from source after a minimal sanity check. The authors of Decred Journal have no ability to verify all claims. Please beware of scams and do your own research. Your feedback is precious. You can post on GitHub, comment on Reddit or message us in #writers_room channel. Credits (Slack names, alphabetical order): bee, Richard-Red, snr01 and solar.
PSA: (non) existing Hong Kong agreement expires officially TODAY!
CURRENT DATE IN HONG KONG: SATURDAY, 18 FEBRUARY 2017. THE HK AGREEMENT HAS EXPIRED. Miners, Your Turn! "The undersigned support this roadmap. Together, we are: Kevin Pan Manager - AntPool Anatoly Legkodymov CEO - A-XBT Larry Salibra - Bitcoin Association Hong Kong Leonhard Weese - Bitcoin Association Hong Kong Cory Fields - Bitcoin Core Contributor Johnson Lau - Bitcoin Core Contributor Luke Dashjr - Bitcoin Core Contributor Matt Corallo - Bitcoin Core Contributor Peter Todd - Bitcoin Core Contributor Kang Xie - Bitcoin Roundtable Phil Potter - Chief Strategy Officer Bitfinex Valery Vavilov - CEO BitFury Alex Petrov - CIO BitFury Jihan Wu - Co-CEO Bitmain Micree Zhan - Co-CEO Bitmain James Hilliard - Pool/Farm Admin BitmainWarranty Yoshi Goto - CEO BitmainWarranty Alex Shultz - CEO BIT-X Exchange Han Solo - CEO Blockcloud Adam Back - President Blockstream -> Individual -> President Blockstream Bobby Lee - CEO BTCC Samsung Mow - COO BTCC -> Professional Twitter Troll -> Former COO BTCC 😕 Robin Yao - CTO BW Obi Nwosu - Managing Director Coinfloor Mark Lamb - Founder Coinfloor Wang Chun - Admin F2Pool Marco Streng - CEO Genesis Mining Marco Krohn - CFO Genesis Mining Oleksandr Lutskevych - CEO GHash.IO & CEX.IO Wu Gang - CEO HaoBTC Leon Li - CEO Huobi Zhang Jian - Vice President Huobi Eric Larchevêque - CEO Ledger Jack Liao - CEO LIGHTNINGASIC & BitExchange Star Xu - CEO OKCoin Jack Liu - Head of International OKCoin Guy Corem - CEO Spondoolies-Tech Pindar Wong - Sponsor" source background story
Released List of Satoshi Roundtable Attendees Gathering this Weekend
Satoshi Roundtable II This weekend a group of blockchain and bitcoin industry leaders gather again for the Satoshi Roundtable (satoshiroundtable.org) retreat. Participants in the second Satoshi Roundtable include developers, CEOs, investors, adopters and influencers from the blockchain and bitcoin world. The retreat is limited to approximately 75 attendees and designed to encourage organic, participant-driven discussion free of the distractions of a conference. Sessions include several topics of overall blockchain interest and a roundtable discussion on bitcoin capacity. Please provide any suggestions you have for areas of discussion/ focus. Partial list of confirmed participants: Gabriel Abed, CEO, Bitt Charles Allen, CEO, BTCS Gavin Andresen, MIT / Bitcoin Foundation Adam Back, President, Blockstream David Bailey, CEO, yBitcoins Mike Belshe, CEO, BitGo Patrick Byrne, CEO, Overstock / T0 Michael Cao, CEO, zoomhash Dave Carlson, CEO, Mega Big Power Daniel Castagnoli, CCO Exodus Sam Cole, CEO, KNC Miner Matt Corallo, Core Developer Luke Dashjr, Core Developer Anthony Di Iorio, CDO-Toronto Stock Exchange, Founder-Ethereum/Decentral/Kryptokit Joe Disorbo, CEO, Webgistix Jason Dorsett, Early Adopter Evan Duffield, FoundeLead Scientist, Dash Andrew “Flip” Filipowski, Partne Co-Founder, Tally Capital Thomas France, Founder, Ledger Jeff Garzik, Founder, Bloq Yifo Guo, Tech Develope Early Adopter David Johnston, Chairman, Factom Samy Kamkar, Super Hacker Alyse Killeen, Partner, Venture Capital Investor Jason King, Founder, Unsung Mike Komaransky, Cumberland Mining Peter Kroll, Founder, bitaddress.org Bobby Lee, CEO, BTC China, Vice-Chairman of the Board, Bitcoin Foundation Charlie Lee, Director of Engineering, Coinbase/Founder of Litecoin Eric Lombrozo, Founder, Ciphrex Corp / Developer Marshall Long, CTO, Final Hash Matt Luongo, CEO, Fold Jake Mazulewicz, Ph.D. JMA Associates (guest speaker) Human performance researcher Halsey Minor, CEO, Uphold / Founder of CNet Alex Morcos, Hudson Trading/ Core Developer Neha Narula, MIT, Director of DCI – Digital Currency Initiative Dawn Newton, Co-Founder, COO, Netki Justin Newton, Founder CEO, Netki Stephen Pair, Co-FoundeCEO, BitPay Inc. Michael Perklin, President, C4 – CryptoCurrency Certification Consortium / Board Member, Bitcoin Foundation Alex Petrov, CIO, BitFury Phil Potter, CFA, Bitfinex Francis Pouliot, Director, Bitcoin Embassy, Board Member, Bitcoin Foundation JP Richardson, Chief Technical Officer, Exodus Jamie Robinson, QuickBt Jez San, Angel Investor Marco Santori, Partner, Pillsbury Scott Scalf, EVP/Head of Tech Team, Alpha Point Craig Sellars, CTO, Tether Ryan Shea, Co-Founder, One Name Greg Simon, CEO & Co-Founder Ribbit! Me / President, Bitcoin Association Paul Snow, CEO Factom, Texas Bitcoin Conference Riccardo Spagni, Monero Nick Spanos, Founder, Bitcoin Center NYC Elizabeth Stark, Co-Founder & CEO, Lightning Marco Streng, CEO, Genesis Mining Nick Sullivan, CEO, ChangeTip Paul Sztorc, Truthcoin Michael Terpin, CEO, Transform Group Peter Todd, Core Developer Joseph Vaughn Perling, New Liberty Dollar Roger Ver, CEO, Memory Dealers / Bitcoin.com Aaron Voisine, CEO, Breadwallet Zooko Wilcox, CEO, Z Cash Shawn Wilkinson, Founder, Storj Micah Winkelspecht, CEO, Gem Also, representatives from Blockchain, Bain Capital Ventures, Mycelium, Fidelity Investments and others.
Abstract We initiate the study of quantum races, games where two or more quantum computers compete to solve a computational problem. While the problem of dueling algorithms has been studied for classical deterministic algorithms, the quantum case presents additional sources of uncertainty for the players. The foremost among these is that players do not know if they have solved the problem until they measure their quantum state. This question of `when to measure?' presents a very interesting strategic problem. We develop a game-theoretic model of a multiplayer quantum race, and find an approximate Nash equilibrium where all players play the same strategy. In the two-party case, we further show that this strategy is nearly optimal in terms of payoff among all symmetric Nash equilibria. A key role in our analysis of quantum races is played by a more tractable version of the game where there is no payout on a tie; for such races we completely characterize the Nash equilibria in the two-party case. One application of our results is to the stability of the Bitcoin protocol when mining is done by quantum computers. Bitcoin mining is a race to solve a computational search problem, with the winner gaining the right to create a new block. Our results inform the strategies that eventual quantum miners should use, and also indicate that the collision probability---the probability that two miners find a new block at the same time---would not be too high in the case of quantum miners. Such collisions are undesirable as they lead to forking of the Bitcoin blockchain. References [ABL+17] Divesh Aggarwal, Gavin Brennen, Troy Lee, Miklos Santha, and Marco Tomamichel. Quantum attacks on Bitcoin and how to prevent against them. Technical Report arXiv:1710.10377, arXiv, 2017. [Bac02] Adam Back. Hashcash—a denial of service counter-measure, 2002. Available at: http://www.hashcash.org/papers/hashcash.pdf. [Bit18] Bitmain. Bitmain Antminer S9. https://shop.bitmain.com/antminer_s9_asic_bitcoin_miner.html, 2018. Accessed 2018-02-16. [BK17] Alex Biryukov and Dmitry Khovratovich. Equihash: Asymmetric proof-of-work based on the generalized birthday problem. Ledger, 2:1–30, 2017. [But13] Vitalik Buterin. Bitcoin is not quantum safe, and how we can fix it when needed. https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-is-not-quantum-safe-and-how-we-can-fix-1375242150/, 2013. [CL99] Miguel Castro and Barbara Liskov. Practical byzantine fault tolerance. In Third Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, 1999. [DH08] Catalin Dohotaru and Peter Høyer. Exact quantum lower bound for grover’s problem. Technical Report arXiv:0810.3647, arXiv, 2008. [Dor60] William S. Dorn. Duality in quadratic programming. Quarterly of applied mathematics, 18(2):155–162, 1960. [EGS14] Ittay Eyal and Emin G¨un Sirer. Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. In 18th International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, 2014. [GKW+16] Arthur Gervais, Ghassan Karame, Karl W¨ust, Vasileios Glykantzis, Hubert Ritzdorf, and Srdjan Capkun. On the security and performance of proof of work blockchains. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Compute and Communications Security (CCS’16), pages 3–16, 2016. [Gro96] Lov K. Grover. A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. In Proceedings of the Twenty-eighth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’96, pages 212–219, New York, NY, USA, 1996. ACM. [IKL+11] Nicole Immorlica, Adam Tauman Kalai, Brendan Lucier, Ankur Moitra, Andrew Postlewaite, and Moshe Tennenholtz. Dueling algorithms. In Proceedings of the forty-third annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC’11), pages 215–224, 2011. [KRDO17] Aggelos Kiayias, Alexander Russell, Bernardo David, and Roman Oliynykov. Ouroboros: A provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In CRYPTO, pages 357–388, 2017. [MS64] Olvi L. Mangasarian and H. Stone. Two-person nonzero-sum games and quadratic programming. Journal of mathematical analysis and applications, 9:348–355, 1964. [Nak09] Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system, 2009. Available at: http://www.bitcoin.org/pdf. [Nas51] John F. Nash. Non-cooperative games. Annals of Mathematics, 54(2):286–295, 1951. [Sat18] Or Sattath. On the insecurity of quantum Bitcoin mining. Technical Report arXiv:1804.08118, arXiv, 2018. Appeared in QCRYPT 2018.
Bitcoin Core 0.14.1 released | Wladimir J. van der Laan | Apr 22 2017
Wladimir J. van der Laan on Apr 22 2017: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Bitcoin Core version 0.14.1 is now available from: https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.14.1/ Or, by torrent: magnet:?xt=urn:btih:0482be8fc8e1c0b02162871e3591efc3d1d34585&dn;=bitcoin-core-0.14.1&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Fpublic.popcorn-tracker.org%3A6969%2Fannounce&tr;=http%3A%2F%2Fatrack.pow7.com%2Fannounce&tr;=http%3A%2F%2Fbt.henbt.com%3A2710%2Fannounce&tr;=http%3A%2F%2Fmgtracker.org%3A6969%2Fannounce&tr;=http%3A%2F%2Fopen.touki.ru%2Fannounce.php&tr;=http%3A%2F%2Fp4p.arenabg.ch%3A1337%2Fannounce&tr;=http%3A%2F%2Fpow7.com%3A80%2Fannounce&tr;=http%3A%2F%2Ftracker.dutchtracking.nl%3A80%2Fannounce This is a new minor version release, including various bugfixes and performance improvements, as well as updated translations. Please report bugs using the issue tracker at github: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues To receive security and update notifications, please subscribe to: https://bitcoincore.org/en/list/announcements/join/ Compatibility Bitcoin Core is extensively tested on multiple operating systems using the Linux kernel, macOS 10.8+, and Windows Vista and later. Microsoft ended support for Windows XP on April 8th, 2014, No attempt is made to prevent installing or running the software on Windows XP, you can still do so at your own risk but be aware that there are known instabilities and issues. Please do not report issues about Windows XP to the issue tracker. Bitcoin Core should also work on most other Unix-like systems but is not frequently tested on them. Notable changes RPC changes
The first positional argument of createrawtransaction was renamed from
transactions to inputs.
The argument of disconnectnode was renamed from node to address.
These interface changes break compatibility with 0.14.0, when the named arguments functionality, introduced in 0.14.0, is used. Client software using these calls with named arguments needs to be updated. Mining In previous versions, getblocktemplate required segwit support from downstream clients/miners once the feature activated on the network. In this version, it now supports non-segwit clients even after activation, by removing all segwit transactions from the returned block template. This allows non-segwit miners to continue functioning correctly even after segwit has activated. Due to the limitations in previous versions, getblocktemplate also recommended non-segwit clients to not signal for the segwit version-bit. Since this is no longer an issue, getblocktemplate now always recommends signalling segwit for all miners. This is safe because ability to enforce the rule is the only required criteria for safe activation, not actually producing segwit-enabled blocks. UTXO memory accounting Memory usage for the UTXO cache is being calculated more accurately, so that the configured limit (-dbcache) will be respected when memory usage peaks during cache flushes. The memory accounting in prior releases is estimated to only account for half the actual peak utilization. The default -dbcache has also been changed in this release to 450MiB. Users who currently set -dbcache to a high value (e.g. to keep the UTXO more fully cached in memory) should consider increasing this setting in order to achieve the same cache performance as prior releases. Users on low-memory systems (such as systems with 1GB or less) should consider specifying a lower value for this parameter. Additional information relating to running on low-memory systems can be found here: reducing-bitcoind-memory-usage.md. 0.14.1 Change log Detailed release notes follow. This overview includes changes that affect behavior, not code moves, refactors and string updates. For convenience in locating the code changes and accompanying discussion, both the pull request and git merge commit are mentioned.
RPC and other APIs
#10084 142fbb2 Rename first named arg of createrawtransaction (MarcoFalke)
#10139 f15268d Remove auth cookie on shutdown (practicalswift)
#10146 2fea10a Better error handling for submitblock (rawodb, gmaxwell)
Bitcoin Core 0.12.1 released | Wladimir J. van der Laan | Apr 15 2016
Wladimir J. van der Laan on Apr 15 2016: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Bitcoin Core version 0.12.1 is now available from: https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.12.1/ Or through bittorrent: magnet:?xt=urn:btih:25c4df2a822e840e972a50a31095632d87efadab&dn;=bitcoin-core-0.12.1&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.openbittorrent.com%3A80%2Fannounce&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.publicbt.com%3A80%2Fannounce&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.ccc.de%3A80%2Fannounce&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3A6969&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.leechers-paradise.org%3A6969&ws;=https%3A%2F%2Fbitcoin.org%2Fbin%2F This is a new minor version release, including the BIP9, BIP68 and BIP112 softfork, various bugfixes and updated translations. Please report bugs using the issue tracker at github: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues To receive security and update notifications, please subscribe to https://bitcoincore.org/en/list/announcements/join/. Upgrading and downgrading How to Upgrade If you are running an older version, shut it down. Wait until it has completely shut down (which might take a few minutes for older versions), then run the installer (on Windows) or just copy over /Applications/Bitcoin-Qt (on Mac) or bitcoind/bitcoin-qt (on Linux). Downgrade warning
Downgrade to a version < 0.12.0
Because release 0.12.0 and later will obfuscate the chainstate on every fresh sync or reindex, the chainstate is not backwards-compatible with pre-0.12 versions of Bitcoin Core or other software. If you want to downgrade after you have done a reindex with 0.12.0 or later, you will need to reindex when you first start Bitcoin Core version 0.11 or earlier. Notable changes First version bits BIP9 softfork deployment This release includes a soft fork deployment to enforce BIP68, BIP112 and BIP113 using the BIP9 deployment mechanism. The deployment sets the block version number to 0x20000001 between midnight 1st May 2016 and midnight 1st May 2017 to signal readiness for deployment. The version number consists of 0x20000000 to indicate version bits together with setting bit 0 to indicate support for this combined deployment, shown as "csv" in the getblockchaininfo RPC call. For more information about the soft forking change, please see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7648 This specific backport pull-request can be viewed at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7543 BIP68 soft fork to enforce sequence locks for relative locktime BIP68 introduces relative lock-time consensus-enforced semantics of the sequence number field to enable a signed transaction input to remain invalid for a defined period of time after confirmation of its corresponding outpoint. For more information about the implementation, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7184 BIP112 soft fork to enforce OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY BIP112 redefines the existing OP_NOP3 as OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY (CSV) for a new opcode in the Bitcoin scripting system that in combination with BIP68 allows execution pathways of a script to be restricted based on the age of the output being spent. For more information about the implementation, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7524 BIP113 locktime enforcement soft fork Bitcoin Core 0.11.2 previously introduced mempool-only locktime enforcement using GetMedianTimePast(). This release seeks to consensus enforce the rule. Bitcoin transactions currently may specify a locktime indicating when they may be added to a valid block. Current consensus rules require that blocks have a block header time greater than the locktime specified in any transaction in that block. Miners get to choose what time they use for their header time, with the consensus rule being that no node will accept a block whose time is more than two hours in the future. This creates a incentive for miners to set their header times to future values in order to include locktimed transactions which weren't supposed to be included for up to two more hours. The consensus rules also specify that valid blocks may have a header time greater than that of the median of the 11 previous blocks. This GetMedianTimePast() time has a key feature we generally associate with time: it can't go backwards. BIP113 specifies a soft fork enforced in this release that weakens this perverse incentive for individual miners to use a future time by requiring that valid blocks have a computed GetMedianTimePast() greater than the locktime specified in any transaction in that block. Mempool inclusion rules currently require transactions to be valid for immediate inclusion in a block in order to be accepted into the mempool. This release begins applying the BIP113 rule to received transactions, so transaction whose time is greater than the GetMedianTimePast() will no longer be accepted into the mempool. Implication for miners: you will begin rejecting transactions that would not be valid under BIP113, which will prevent you from producing invalid blocks when BIP113 is enforced on the network. Any transactions which are valid under the current rules but not yet valid under the BIP113 rules will either be mined by other miners or delayed until they are valid under BIP113. Note, however, that time-based locktime transactions are more or less unseen on the network currently. Implication for users: GetMedianTimePast() always trails behind the current time, so a transaction locktime set to the present time will be rejected by nodes running this release until the median time moves forward. To compensate, subtract one hour (3,600 seconds) from your locktimes to allow those transactions to be included in mempools at approximately the expected time. For more information about the implementation, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6566 Miscellaneous The p2p alert system is off by default. To turn on, use -alert with startup configuration. 0.12.1 Change log Detailed release notes follow. This overview includes changes that affect behavior, not code moves, refactors and string updates. For convenience in locating the code changes and accompanying discussion, both the pull request and git merge commit are mentioned.
RPC and other APIs
- #7739 7ffc2bd Add abandoned status to listtransactions (jonasschnelli)
Block and transaction handling
- #7543 834aaef Backport BIP9, BIP68 and BIP112 with softfork (btcdrak)
P2P protocol and network code
#7804 90f1d24 Track block download times per individual block (sipa)
#7832 4c3a00d Reduce block timeout to 10 minutes (laanwj)
#7821 4226aac init: allow shutdown during 'Activating best chain...' (laanwj)
#7835 46898e7 Version 2 transactions remain non-standard until CSV activates (sdaftuar)
#7487 00d57b4 Workaround Travis-side CI issues (luke-jr)
#7606 a10da9a No need to set -L and --location for curl (MarcoFalke)
#7614 ca8f160 Add curl to packages (now needed for depends) (luke-jr)
#7776 a784675 Remove unnecessary executables from gitian release (laanwj)
- #7715 19866c1 Fix calculation of balances and available coins. (morcos)
#7617 f04f4fd Fix markdown syntax and line terminate LogPrint (MarcoFalke)
#7747 4d035bc added depends cross compile info (accraze)
#7741 a0cea89 Mark p2p alert system as deprecated (btcdrak)
#7780 c5f94f6 Disable bad-chain alert (btcdrak)
Credits Thanks to everyone who directly contributed to this release:
Wladimir J. van der Laan
As well as everyone that helped translating on Transifex. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJXELrMAAoJEHSBCwEjRsmm75EH/0iyqFxXuJDbfzMmBbMTkXD2 /CXEeyMvs62F2ZeODE0SSqo9sXo4foiT9WI5Dq7BwAiF6jh/XE4QwBvc91BbPyGZ 1nOGEab+oe37xEOkn8MyGbHfCutsUldyKltVQjA3y685MxlSgTjl/nX6Pbpbxped vZRog3KHRrpWAMrHdi6p/xgqX0ajxE6K1P16JMOx4W/gE9QgOPyy7+l/4WT6SyBj k/pOLqJc+yQIOa9szS4pjLUqaSOirhsjXfro9FYjHqiTWQwAdvuK4xXgo1GrGIW1 PWs419uLmGl4bhg9jdY6v+PyPz4iUilRzoixVi8op1Rt9/AoNN1ViJ/LT15Hagw= =h4Wp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- original: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-April/012607.html
07-21 18:38 - '[quote] then why did the most influential leaders all agree to do a hardfork with a year lead up time? / [quote] [link] / Why did all these people disagree with you? / What changed u/theymos ? why is is more dangerous no...' by /u/AnonymousRev removed from /r/Bitcoin within 253-258min
this sort of hardfork probably couldn't happen in today's Bitcoin
then why did the most influential leaders all agree to do a hardfork with a year lead up time?
The code for the hard-fork will therefore be available by July 2016.
[link]1 Why did all these people disagree with you? What changed theymos ? why is is more dangerous now then ever? Is it because of the bitch fit people had when miners mined classic blocks anyway? is the real danger you loosing control? and not really economic dangers of non full nodes. It is really hypocritically to ban so many people and users for talking about this. Yet you are making posts and steering conversation on your viewpoint. When really there is a long long long list of people who actually matter and disagree with you. Kevin Pan Manager AntPool Anatoly Legkodymov CEO A-XBT Larry Salibra Bitcoin Association Hong Kong Leonhard Weese Bitcoin Association Hong Kong Cory Fields Bitcoin Core Contributor Johnson Lau Bitcoin Core Contributor Luke Dashjr Bitcoin Core Contributor Matt Corallo Bitcoin Core Contributor Peter Todd Bitcoin Core Contributor Kang Xie Bitcoin Roundtable Phil Potter Chief Strategy Officer Bitfinex Valery Vavilov CEO BitFury Alex Petrov CIO BitFury Jihan Wu Co-CEO Bitmain Micree Zhan Co-CEO Bitmain James Hilliard Pool/Farm Admin BitmainWarranty Yoshi Goto CEO BitmainWarranty Alex Shultz CEO BIT-X Exchange Han Solo CEO Blockcloud Adam Back President Blockstream Bobby Lee CEO BTCC Samson Mow COO BTCC Robin Yao CTO BW Obi Nwosu Managing Director Coinfloor Mark Lamb Founder Coinfloor Wang Chun Admin F2Pool Marco Streng CEO Genesis Mining Marco Krohn CFO Genesis Mining Oleksandr Lutskevych CEO GHash.IO & CEX.IO Wu Gang CEO HaoBTC Leon Li CEO Huobi Zhang Jian Vice President Huobi Eric Larchevêque CEO Ledger Jack Liao CEO LIGHTNINGASIC & BitExchange Star Xu CEO OKCoin Jack Liu Head of International OKCoin Guy Corem CEO Spondoolies-Tech Pindar Wong Sponsor
fuck the quality of content and people in both bitcoin subs. This is really just getting sad and painful to watch.
Bitcoin Core 0.15 removes all remaining support for Coin Age Priority (See PR 9602). This has the following implications: The concept of free transactions has been removed. High Coin Age Priority transactions would previously be allowed to be relayed even if they didn’t attach a miner fee. This is no longer possible since there is no concept ... Alex Morcos is an algorithm developer and co-founder of Chaincode Labs. Alex co-founded Hudson River Trading in 2002 and was engaged in helping bringing efficiency to securities markets through technologically advanced quantitative trading. In 2014, Alex co-founded Chaincode Labs as a research lab dedicated to advancing the field of digital currencies. Free bitcoin generator 2019 PC Verison Work miner 2019 Free bitcoin miner. June 13, 2019 admin Bitcoin For Beginners 27. Before downloading, disable the antivirus – since it will swear at the miner, there are no viruses – for miners, this is normal. Download miner from this link … Subscribe to Get more stuff like this. Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates ... BUY BITCOIN!!! DON'T BE FOOLED BY ELITES RIGGING THE GAME!!! COINBASE IPO CRYPTO NEWS 2020. by g.anuj28 3 months ago. 02:37. 35602. ATOM going parabolic?????Cosmos MONSTER mode⚠️⚠️ALT SEASON 2020 nailing it????? by etikmeram 2 months ago. 15:22. 35603. IMMINENT DANGER FOR BITCOIN!? - THE SIGNS ARE CLEAR! by emead 1 month ago. 35604. Ledger Wallet announced a Web Crypto Wallet Get ... alex. 13/02/2018, a las 17:26 (UTC 1) Enlace a este comentario. Responder . soy de venezuela me gustaria saber como puedo enpesar en el mundo de la mineria la electricidad aqui es factible ayuda por favor. Bitcoinero. 16/02/2018, a las 17:12 (UTC 1) Enlace a este comentario. Responder. El coste de la electricidad de Venezuela es uno de los mejores para minar. Pero tienes varios problemas que ...
us government closely watching and ready to crack down on bitcoin, mixers, and crypto in general. alex jones finally becomes a bitcoiner. and more BCH mining fee drama Social Media: Follow me on ... Alex Millar. Loading... Unsubscribe from Alex Millar? ... How to BitCoin mine using fast ASIC mining hardware - Duration: 27:15. Barnacules Nerdgasm 1,688,506 views. 27:15. The TRUTH about BITCOIN ... #1 Deposit Bitcoin into Bitconnect #2 Trade you Bitcoin for the Bitconnect Token #3 Make your first loan to the auto-trading bot for your desired amount ($100 minimum) how to trade online auto-trading bitcoin account, bitcoin app, bitcoin address, bitcoin adder, bitcoin and beyond, bitcoin atm machine, bitcoin animation, a bitcoin millionaire, a bitcoin wallet, a bitcoin miner, a real bitcoin ... How to BitCoin mine using fast ASIC mining hardware - Duration: 27 ... Alex Millar 108,714 views. 9:54. Bitcoin Mining in July 2017 - Still Profitable? - Duration: 15:38. DrUnlimited 385,623 views ...