Exploring parallelism in Racket with SHA-512 mining ...

Groestlcoin 6th Anniversary Release

Introduction

Dear Groestlers, it goes without saying that 2020 has been a difficult time for millions of people worldwide. The groestlcoin team would like to take this opportunity to wish everyone our best to everyone coping with the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19. Let it bring out the best in us all and show that collectively, we can conquer anything.
The centralised banks and our national governments are facing unprecedented times with interest rates worldwide dropping to record lows in places. Rest assured that this can only strengthen the fundamentals of all decentralised cryptocurrencies and the vision that was seeded with Satoshi's Bitcoin whitepaper over 10 years ago. Despite everything that has been thrown at us this year, the show must go on and the team will still progress and advance to continue the momentum that we have developed over the past 6 years.
In addition to this, we'd like to remind you all that this is Groestlcoin's 6th Birthday release! In terms of price there have been some crazy highs and lows over the years (with highs of around $2.60 and lows of $0.000077!), but in terms of value– Groestlcoin just keeps getting more valuable! In these uncertain times, one thing remains clear – Groestlcoin will keep going and keep innovating regardless. On with what has been worked on and completed over the past few months.

UPDATED - Groestlcoin Core 2.18.2

This is a major release of Groestlcoin Core with many protocol level improvements and code optimizations, featuring the technical equivalent of Bitcoin v0.18.2 but with Groestlcoin-specific patches. On a general level, most of what is new is a new 'Groestlcoin-wallet' tool which is now distributed alongside Groestlcoin Core's other executables.
NOTE: The 'Account' API has been removed from this version which was typically used in some tip bots. Please ensure you check the release notes from 2.17.2 for details on replacing this functionality.

How to Upgrade?

Windows
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.
OSX
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), run the dmg and drag Groestlcoin Core to Applications.
Ubuntu
http://groestlcoin.org/forum/index.php?topic=441.0

Other Linux

http://groestlcoin.org/forum/index.php?topic=97.0

Download

Download the Windows Installer (64 bit) here
Download the Windows Installer (32 bit) here
Download the Windows binaries (64 bit) here
Download the Windows binaries (32 bit) here
Download the OSX Installer here
Download the OSX binaries here
Download the Linux binaries (64 bit) here
Download the Linux binaries (32 bit) here
Download the ARM Linux binaries (64 bit) here
Download the ARM Linux binaries (32 bit) here

Source

ALL NEW - Groestlcoin Moonshine iOS/Android Wallet

Built with React Native, Moonshine utilizes Electrum-GRS's JSON-RPC methods to interact with the Groestlcoin network.
GRS Moonshine's intended use is as a hot wallet. Meaning, your keys are only as safe as the device you install this wallet on. As with any hot wallet, please ensure that you keep only a small, responsible amount of Groestlcoin on it at any given time.

Features

Download

iOS
Android

Source

ALL NEW! – HODL GRS Android Wallet

HODL GRS connects directly to the Groestlcoin network using SPV mode and doesn't rely on servers that can be hacked or disabled.
HODL GRS utilizes AES hardware encryption, app sandboxing, and the latest security features to protect users from malware, browser security holes, and even physical theft. Private keys are stored only in the secure enclave of the user's phone, inaccessible to anyone other than the user.
Simplicity and ease-of-use is the core design principle of HODL GRS. A simple recovery phrase (which we call a Backup Recovery Key) is all that is needed to restore the user's wallet if they ever lose or replace their device. HODL GRS is deterministic, which means the user's balance and transaction history can be recovered just from the backup recovery key.

Features

Download

Main Release (Main Net)
Testnet Release

Source

ALL NEW! – GroestlcoinSeed Savior

Groestlcoin Seed Savior is a tool for recovering BIP39 seed phrases.
This tool is meant to help users with recovering a slightly incorrect Groestlcoin mnemonic phrase (AKA backup or seed). You can enter an existing BIP39 mnemonic and get derived addresses in various formats.
To find out if one of the suggested addresses is the right one, you can click on the suggested address to check the address' transaction history on a block explorer.

Features

Live Version (Not Recommended)

https://www.groestlcoin.org/recovery/

Download

https://github.com/Groestlcoin/mnemonic-recovery/archive/master.zip

Source

ALL NEW! – Vanity Search Vanity Address Generator

NOTE: NVidia GPU or any CPU only. AMD graphics cards will not work with this address generator.
VanitySearch is a command-line Segwit-capable vanity Groestlcoin address generator. Add unique flair when you tell people to send Groestlcoin. Alternatively, VanitySearch can be used to generate random addresses offline.
If you're tired of the random, cryptic addresses generated by regular groestlcoin clients, then VanitySearch is the right choice for you to create a more personalized address.
VanitySearch is a groestlcoin address prefix finder. If you want to generate safe private keys, use the -s option to enter your passphrase which will be used for generating a base key as for BIP38 standard (VanitySearch.exe -s "My PassPhrase" FXPref). You can also use VanitySearch.exe -ps "My PassPhrase" which will add a crypto secure seed to your passphrase.
VanitySearch may not compute a good grid size for your GPU, so try different values using -g option in order to get the best performances. If you want to use GPUs and CPUs together, you may have best performances by keeping one CPU core for handling GPU(s)/CPU exchanges (use -t option to set the number of CPU threads).

Features

Usage

https://github.com/Groestlcoin/VanitySearch#usage

Download

Source

ALL NEW! – Groestlcoin EasyVanity 2020

Groestlcoin EasyVanity 2020 is a windows app built from the ground-up and makes it easier than ever before to create your very own bespoke bech32 address(es) when whilst not connected to the internet.
If you're tired of the random, cryptic bech32 addresses generated by regular Groestlcoin clients, then Groestlcoin EasyVanity2020 is the right choice for you to create a more personalised bech32 address. This 2020 version uses the new VanitySearch to generate not only legacy addresses (F prefix) but also Bech32 addresses (grs1 prefix).

Features

Download

Source

Remastered! – Groestlcoin WPF Desktop Wallet (v2.19.0.18)

Groestlcoin WPF is an alternative full node client with optional lightweight 'thin-client' mode based on WPF. Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) is one of Microsoft's latest approaches to a GUI framework, used with the .NET framework. Its main advantages over the original Groestlcoin client include support for exporting blockchain.dat and including a lite wallet mode.
This wallet was previously deprecated but has been brought back to life with modern standards.

Features

Remastered Improvements

Download

Source

ALL NEW! – BIP39 Key Tool

Groestlcoin BIP39 Key Tool is a GUI interface for generating Groestlcoin public and private keys. It is a standalone tool which can be used offline.

Features

Download

Windows
Linux :
 pip3 install -r requirements.txt python3 bip39\_gui.py 

Source

ALL NEW! – Electrum Personal Server

Groestlcoin Electrum Personal Server aims to make using Electrum Groestlcoin wallet more secure and more private. It makes it easy to connect your Electrum-GRS wallet to your own full node.
It is an implementation of the Electrum-grs server protocol which fulfils the specific need of using the Electrum-grs wallet backed by a full node, but without the heavyweight server backend, for a single user. It allows the user to benefit from all Groestlcoin Core's resource-saving features like pruning, blocks only and disabled txindex. All Electrum-GRS's feature-richness like hardware wallet integration, multi-signature wallets, offline signing, seed recovery phrases, coin control and so on can still be used, but connected only to the user's own full node.
Full node wallets are important in Groestlcoin because they are a big part of what makes the system be trust-less. No longer do people have to trust a financial institution like a bank or PayPal, they can run software on their own computers. If Groestlcoin is digital gold, then a full node wallet is your own personal goldsmith who checks for you that received payments are genuine.
Full node wallets are also important for privacy. Using Electrum-GRS under default configuration requires it to send (hashes of) all your Groestlcoin addresses to some server. That server can then easily spy on your transactions. Full node wallets like Groestlcoin Electrum Personal Server would download the entire blockchain and scan it for the user's own addresses, and therefore don't reveal to anyone else which Groestlcoin addresses they are interested in.
Groestlcoin Electrum Personal Server can also broadcast transactions through Tor which improves privacy by resisting traffic analysis for broadcasted transactions which can link the IP address of the user to the transaction. If enabled this would happen transparently whenever the user simply clicks "Send" on a transaction in Electrum-grs wallet.
Note: Currently Groestlcoin Electrum Personal Server can only accept one connection at a time.

Features

Download

Windows
Linux / OSX (Instructions)

Source

UPDATED – Android Wallet 7.38.1 - Main Net + Test Net

The app allows you to send and receive Groestlcoin on your device using QR codes and URI links.
When using this app, please back up your wallet and email them to yourself! This will save your wallet in a password protected file. Then your coins can be retrieved even if you lose your phone.

Changes

Download

Main Net
Main Net (FDroid)
Test Net

Source

UPDATED – Groestlcoin Sentinel 3.5.06 (Android)

Groestlcoin Sentinel is a great solution for anyone who wants the convenience and utility of a hot wallet for receiving payments directly into their cold storage (or hardware wallets).
Sentinel accepts XPUB's, YPUB'S, ZPUB's and individual Groestlcoin address. Once added you will be able to view balances, view transactions, and (in the case of XPUB's, YPUB's and ZPUB's) deterministically generate addresses for that wallet.
Groestlcoin Sentinel is a fork of Groestlcoin Samourai Wallet with all spending and transaction building code removed.

Changes

Download

Source

UPDATED – P2Pool Test Net

Changes

Download

Pre-Hosted Testnet P2Pool is available via http://testp2pool.groestlcoin.org:21330/static/

Source

submitted by Yokomoko_Saleen to groestlcoin [link] [comments]

Gauging interest: prepare a fork in case ABC and BTC-favouring miners enforce the protocol tax on BCH

Posting this to start a public discussion about the possible solutions for the current issue.
I think the proposed tax and the way this cabal tries to force their way is analogous to Blockstream hijacking BTC.
I believe that there is no place for a protocol level tax and centrally planned redistribution of blockrewards in an independent protocol.
BitcoinABC and a few BTC miners seem to ignore all industry feedback and backlash currently which is again eerily similar to the tactics of Blockstream (despite all the outcrys they prevented lifting the temporary capacity limit on BTC).
I think it's highly important to prepare the code and start to engage the major service providers.
My proposal is to switch the mining algorithm to a CPU or GPU based one preferably a cryptonight variant, SHA512 or randomx based algo.
Would there be interest in preparing this? What are you thoughts?
submitted by usrn to bitcoin_unlimited [link] [comments]

What is Ravencoin?

Ravencoin is a digital peer to peer network that aims to implement a use case specific blockchain, designed to efficiently handle one specific function: the transfer of assets from one party to another. Built on a fork of the Bitcoin code, Ravencoin was launched January 3rd, 2018, and is a truly open source project (no ICO or masternodes). It focuses on building a useful technology, with a strong and growing community.

How Ravencoin works

A Ravencoin post on Medium from November 2017 references Game of Thrones when introducing this experimental currency:
“In the fictional world of Westeros, ravens are used as messengers who carry statements of truth. Ravencoin is a use case specific blockchain designed to carry statements of truth about who owns what assets”
Launched on January 3rd, 2018, the ninth anniversary of bitcoin’s launch, Ravencoin is an open-source project designed to enable instant payments to anyone around the world. The aim of the project is to create a blockchain optimized specifically for the transfer of assets such as tokens from one holder to another.
A fork of the bitcoin code, Ravencoin features four key changes:

This algorithm is intended to address the centralization of mining caused by ASIC hardware. In the X16R algorithm paper, the team behind the currency explains that the fixed order of ordinary hashing algorithms lends itself to the construction of ASIC miners.
However, the X16R algorithm aims to overcome this problem by constantly disrupting the ordering of the hashing algorithms – it uses the same algorithms used in X15 and SHA512, but the ordering of those algorithms is changed based on the hash of the previous block.

Unique characteristics of Ravencoin


submitted by Aolga1965 to u/Aolga1965 [link] [comments]

Switching to BIP101 with 1% of hashing power

Just construct one block that connects to previous block header, then switch to SHA512 to construct new block header, we all go back to GPU mining. All centralised mining equipment becomes redundant.
It would take at most 2 days to create this block with 1% hashing power.
Node could be coded to accept new genesis transition block after specified block number.
It would take at least 6 months for SHA512 asic to be deployed.
submitted by BIP101010101010101 to bitcoinxt [link] [comments]

What happens if the Hashing algorithm gets changed.

Am I right in thinking that (assuming enough miners agree) - it would be possible to change from SHA256 to some other algo - eg. SHA512 or something different entirely?
Wouldn't that also make all those special dedicated ASIC mining rigs useless as they are made for SHA256 only.
At the same time the electricity footprint for the bitcoin ecosystem would go way down - but since the difficulty can be adjusted - it will make no difference to usefulness/transactions.
TL;DR - if the hash algorithm changes for bitcoin - you would save a lot of electricity and piss off a bunch of miners who bought special hardware
submitted by cheesecola to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

ANN: Arionum (ARO)

We would like to proudly announce Arionum, a new cryptocurrency built from scratch!
Introduction
Arionum was designed with the future in mind, in a market where the growth beats all expectations. Arionum aims to offer a secure electronic payments system that is able to scale without a degraded performance or a degraded user experience. It offers a fixed 0.25% fee on all transactions and it has a dynamic transaction limit per block, allowing it to keep up with a growing number of transactions at all times.
One of the main advantages of Arionum is that it was fully written from scratch in PHP, one of the most popular programming languages in the world. While php is not as fast as c++. for example, the high number of developers that can easily understand and develop PHP and the Arionum compensates for this. The main inspiration has been Satoshi Nakamoto's bitcoin white paper, but all the code has been thought and written by the developers to keep it's originality.
Arionum has been thought as a democratic and egalitarian coin, having no pre-mined coins, long mining period, no developer fees and an algorithm that advantages the average user with available CPU resources rather than mining farms.
Original Announcement: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2710248.0
Specifications
Name: Arionum
Symbol: ARO
Block time: ~ 4 minutes
Mining reward: Starts at 1000 and decreases by 10 each 10800 blocks
Mining time: 8 years and 4 months
Premine: NO Premine
Transaction fee: Always 0.25%
Block Hash: sha512
Mining algorithm: Argon2i + SHA512
Total coin supply: 545.399.000
Signature Algorithm: ECDSA's secp256k1 curve
DB Backend: MySQL / MariaDB
Whitepaper: https://www.arionum.com/wp.pdf
Roadmap
Download links
Official links
Official website: https://www.arionum.com
Block explorer: https://arionum.info
Forum: https://forum.arionum.com
FAQ: https://forum.arionum.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=11
Social networking
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ArionumCrypto
Discord: https://arionum.info/discord/
Pools
Official Pool: http://aropool.com
submitted by AroDev to Arionum [link] [comments]

Defending against empty or near empty blocks from malicious miner takeover? | CANNON | Mar 24 2017

CANNON on Mar 24 2017:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
When the original white paper was written the idea was that nodes
would be miners at same time. That the distribution of mining power
being mostly on par with the distribution of nodes if I understand
correctly. The problem we face now I fear, is the mining power
becoming centralized. Even if every bitcoin node invested a $1000
into mining power and mined at a loss, it still would not even
make a dent in hash distribution. Currently there are around 6000
known nodes. If each node invested $1000 for say 10 ths of hashing
power. At current hashrate of around 3,674,473,142 GH/s this would
only make up %16 of hash power. This is out of balance as while
nodes are distributed mining power is becoming very centralized
due to the creation of monopolization of ASICs. The problem we
are facing is a small group of a couple people whom control a
large amount and growing of hash power. At time of this writing
it has quickly risen to 39% and at current rate will soon become
50% of hashing power that is controlled by a small group of a few
people. Their intentions are too hijack the bitcoin network to a
cryptocurrency that suits their dangerous agenda. Dangerous because
their plan would centralize power of consensus as I understand it,
to themselves the miners. Dangerous also because the code base of
the attempting subverters is buggy, insecure, and reckless from a
technological standpoint. Even though they only have very minute
amount of nodes compared to legitimate bitcion nodes, the danger
is that they are very quickly taking over in mining power. While
it is true that nodes will not accept invalid blocks that would be
attempted to be pushed by the conspirators, they are threatening to
attack the valid (or in their words, "minority chain") by dedicating
some mining power soley to attacking the valid chain by mining empty
blocks and orphaning the valid chain. So even though the majority
of nodes would be enforcing what blocks are valid and as a result
block the non-compliant longer chain, the conspiring miner can simply
(as they are currently threatening to) make the valid chain unuseable
by mining empty blocks.
If a malicious miner with half or majority control passes invalid
blocks, the worst case scenario is a hardfork coin split in which
the non-compliant chain becomes an alt. However the problem is that
this malicious miner is very recently threatening to not just simply
fork, but to kill the valid chain to force economic activity to the
adversary controlled chain. If we can simply defend against attacks
to the valid chain, we can prevent the valid chain from dying.
While empty or near empty blocks would generally be protected by
the incentive of miners to make money. The threat is there if the
malicious miner with majority control is willing to lose out on
these transaction fees and block reward if their intention is to
suppress it to force the majority onto their chain.
Proposal for potential solution Update nodes to ignore empty blocks,
so this way mined empty blocks cannot be used to DOS attack the
blockchain. But what about defense from say, blocks that are
not empty but intentionally only have a couple transactions
in it? Possible to have nodes not only ignore empty blocks,
but also blocks that are abnormally small compared to number of
valid transactions in mempool?
For example would be something like this:
If block = (empty OR <%75 of mempool) THEN discard
This threshold just an example.
What would be any potentials risks
and attacks resulting from both having such new rulesets and not
doing anything?
Lets assume that the first problem of blocking empty or near empty
blocks has been mitigated with the above proposed solution. How
likely and possible would it be for a malicious miner with lots of
mining power to orphan the chain after so many blocks even with
non empty blocks? Is there a need to mitigate this?
If so is it possible?
Time is running short I fear. There needs to be discussion on various
attacks and how they can be guarded against along with various
other contingency plans.
Cannon
PGP Fingerprint: 2BB5 15CD 66E7 4E28 45DC 6494 A5A2 2879 3F06 E832
Email: cannon at cannon-ciota.info
NOTICE: ALL EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE NOT SIGNED/ENCRYPTED WITH PGP SHOULD
BE CONSIDERED POTENTIALLY FORGED, AND NOT PRIVATE.
If this matters to you, use PGP.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=SSuj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
original: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-March/013772.html
submitted by dev_list_bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

Want to *really* help decentralization by getting more full nodes online? Code a simple bandwidth limit option (like in any decent torrent client) in Bitcoin Core so that people can actually run nodes without ruining their connection

This is a big reason why people stop running full nodes, at least home users. I've seen multiple complaints from folks saying that it eats all their bandwidth, making their internet connection nearly unusable. The result? They stop running a full node. And who can blame them?
There's been plenty of discussion on this issue for four years (!) on the Bitcoin GitHub: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/273 - I think with all this recent talk about worries of decreasing full node count, this would be a relatively non-controversial means to make running a full node much more accessible, and therefore greatly increase the number of full nodes on the network.
As it is, the user can apply supplemental bandwidth shapers and QoS rules to deal with this, e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/mastecontrib/qos/tc.sh, but how many people are really going to do that - or even find out that they can?
Concerns on the GitHub issue that this will slow down the network are absurd, in my opinion - for one thing, there's no real incentive to "leech" by capping upload speed well under capacity, and for another, these people who want to regulate the speeds are just going to get frustrated and shut their nodes down completely, as many folks already have. Even if they're throttled, having a great many more nodes than we do now is going to increase the network's speed, not decrease it.
I wish that I had the coding skills to write a patch for this myself, but I do not, and so I just want to try to encourage those who can to make it a higher priority. I think that the impact of this issue has been drastically underestimated by a large number of people.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 For what it's worth (which ain't much), I'll kick in a 0.050 BTC bounty towards a working, tested pull request that implements proper bandwidth limiting in Bitcoin-Core, in a style similar to how most P2P programs do it today (either in the Preferences dialog or somewhere in the main interface). Perhaps someone with a little more in their wallet could add to that bounty. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVjGKXAAoJEJdH3pe6/Nu5mPsP/RS74L7odtEEfJWFIFwZvHLn MNBeB7yv0oegLwK27TPWb/+R+HPTEtW2/q+9xN8GzuyZnfsVoIjWb7mykQm1ILH4 TcGveXvcBYa1TeeZTBoiyrE5qDAN3I15wS+FF97+xANoYY+cmYG3MCd+ctfGT9qb m7/34ppPqTVWD/pAD/A+oIJvPpgsl1nxy78qPCeKHBaSGuCGUqwC2oMOWenwGk7w m+EwJxaWTa60i2+nsACJtUvEHAB+v3LM3dNrNlupxt+Ym47kTCSN99fDJZmvK6 ptI08tSVQz5KbDbqZ7prZdHATBsE0xrI9rMwZYMzv1Vda0vDSR4ggoJOa6JGutqa X33EmzkXk5s7p9DCpcb+4aIucTRknM/oBB/IorIL9bq+Mh6k2MIaguxb+9a446iL dsFRh55t6PAifunVkrFvQyRSqA7MZtQ3wzBP62H2b8oPLwJ4D/eF8WKAGPnUn6YP IOhhvJf9XXKrP42Tvo/cIcPhMnvAF+bMVV0AbTxWzTSHA4qwdfnPlL0AdBCQFhm0 ulCkI9VftzqwGfNl6VPurhOCK2ZGSvaEsc+Zbz2uUex/orf23ihw08ksJjUI9DVP nY82GgULW0wrusQmFmSCaHPsQi2EbUurEcvNiWRWd0ZrayT05zgjtSGregjrdwLR GbGVT+jJHBPBeH+ohbEW =aZqc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
For signature verification, my GPG key with fingerprint 69E7 EB65 1CB6 19DE 9153 3A2B D16B 4CC5 857D 0298 is available at https://np.reddit.com/publickeyexchange/comments/2cmfob/sapiophiles_public_key/, on the major SKS keyservers and on KeyBase at https://keybase.io/sapiophile - my KeyBase proof for this reddit username can be found at https://np.reddit.com/KeybaseProofs/comments/2dfzvj/my_keybase_proof_redditsapiophile/
EDIT: Bounty is now up to 1.65 BTC + $48 in BTC (1.85 BTC total at this time), thanks to wserd, globramma2, CanaryInTheMine, hellobitcoinworld, imaginary_username, Huntred, Melting_Harps, SD7, zebrahat, jefdaj, and especially Place60! Who's next to help sweeten the pot?
submitted by sapiophile to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Introduce private mining (Senate) and public mining (House of Representative) into blockchain ecosystem

In my perception, Proof of work mining is in place to finalize the transaction. And it is the most important piece of the blockchain ecosystem. If there is a counterpart in the real word, probably it would be the US congress. Once president has an idea, need to be passed by the 51% of the congress man. Then it would be the legitimate law.
It is fairly wise that let the majority of the people decide the future of the whole system. The president can only behave well.
However the Father has predicted that the small states interest would be jeopardized as they have less population. Say let California and Alaska play a game according to their population. Alaska will never defeat California.
That is probably the situation in the bitcoin mining field. Those giant players holding big capacity of computing resource are taking advantage of the small capacity players
‘Proof of Stake’ is invented. Somehow it is not the perfect solution, what if it is hacked and yields something evil.
So ‘proof the work’ is the right path. And The Father of the United States has inspired us hundreds of years, split the congress with Senate and House
The same concept in the mining domain would be, introduce private mining and public mining
Private mining: is something needs to be done on specific nodes. (Senate)
Public mining: is something could be done only with computing resource solely (House of the representative)
The detailed steps would be:
The player initiates a transaction, it would produce a proposal, then proposal is reworked on , and produce verdict, (this is the private mining step), and verdict is sent to the public mining, form the blockchain.
Will demonstrate below:
Step1: with the raw statement:
\^jungu::821||70e94c78||1->[email protected]@b49febb3ab920878$$)
jungu is the player,
821||70e94c78||1 is the noteId; 821 is the symbol, 70e94c78 is the noteId, 1 is the quantity
0x2e001 is the recipient of the note,
b49febb3ab920878 is the checksum bit
Step 2: Write the proposal based on the statement
Will get the proposal:
950b75f77d77c9071b8c06f4768f02d2f975731e194bcf3bfaf2ed26ac7ddef568f2c4c51e1db57ff03e6e75a7a3c509837ecb95ee93fa91ce3cc8105706261bc3d5c6d8afab5dad0fb58409dafb7f4571cc372f56b31baec41a0f219d1421e91f6a610aa8b4cb8bd8c0b8c96e5b84dd2fbdfea30349094803fb5e6c4c5d476166e73e7b51fb3043f7de51571946df1fc4010d42d56c8d9178061f69bc9dcd169bbbeed84b7323fe9d15dd05b8231fc813229f05e6c198d021262ea2cf7495d2cc37bb213fc3909f6ae900f7de18e84ad4ed63990dcef29a90b884dd3d95edaa9[email protected]@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
Step3: private mining (Senate confirm the transaction)
Take in the proposal in step1 and produce the verdict: (Senate confirm the transaction)
950b75f77d77c9071b8c06f4768f02d2f975731e194bcf3bfaf2ed26ac7ddef568f2c4c51e1db57ff03e6e75a7a3c509837ecb95ee93fa91ce3cc8105706261bc3d5c6d8afab5dad0fb58409dafb7f4571cc372f56b31baec41a0f219d1421e91f6a610aa8b4cb8bd8c0b8c96e5b84dd2fbdfea30349094803fb5e6c4c5d476166e73e7b51fb3043f7de51571946df1fc4010d42d56c8d9178061f69bc9dcd169bbbeed84b7323fe9d15dd05b8231fc813229f05e6c198d021262ea2cf7495d2cc37bb213fc3909f6ae900f7de18e84ad4ed63990dcef29a90b884dd3d95edaa9[email protected]@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
Download the binary file ‘https://821.credit/verify3
Verify the verdict with “./verify3 ‘verdict’”
Will get the raw statement \^jungu::821||70e94c78||1->[email protected]@b49febb3ab920878$$)
Can Senate produce a verdict without a proposal?
No, it can’t
What if there is an invalid proposal sent to the Senate?
It will be discarded, produce no verdict
Step4: public mining (House of Representative confirms the transaction)
Take the raw statement, proposal, verdict, and get the sha512 signature
279155dc685121e837f54a0c906de721958980f63be6a9756986b0c93a8c14f61b262f5cef6d09805ad5cf9d642ccb5935b19051227ec2513ff03b782596b26b
Append the above signature with a value that makes a sha512 signature starting with ‘3333333
Yeah: found it.
After spending 11 minutes, I find a value ‘0.07708886703295392’, that will work together with 279155dc685121e837f54a0c906de721958980f63be6a9756986b0c93a8c14f61b262f5cef6d09805ad5cf9d642ccb5935b19051227ec2513ff03b782596b26b and produce a sha512 signature 333333305a00afeeff9a09c8e56d65dc59c3e98cc99c050f3c6d3f287c4ce680fb31ff3fa369ecd520b5f538b1af40f60a35d9fcb93f0946c5cd0796a4eb25c3
Some amendments:
Senate can’t be only 1 member. Senate will be divided into 3 cliques. They are ‘Clique3’, ‘Clique7’, and ‘Cliquef’. Each clique will have a bunch of members. Those cliques will have different algorithms to back the same transaction. Say Clique3 log the transaction via English, Clique7 log the transaction via Chinese, and Cliquef log the transaction via French.
On an approved valid transaction, the senate should speak unanimously; every member in every clique should all agree the transaction, otherwise the system would stop to analyze the issue, possible case would be one senator is compromised; the whole senate should stop and get rid of that node, and replace or introduce new ones.
For productivity sake, in public mining phase, usually a bunch of transactions is packed together, and do the mining job quite similar to the bitcoin mechanism. Somehow in the private mining phase, the single transaction is settled by itself.
submitted by 821credit to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Karatcoin App Features

Karatcoin App Features
Karatcoin is a digital currency venture looking to convey gold declarations to the Ethereum blockchain. The stage will digitize your gold possessions, at that point enable you to hold them in your Karatcoin wallet on your cell phone. You can unreservedly exchange Karatcoin tokens (KTC) and gold endorsements through the application.
Karatcoin will create a decentralized gold market application by enabling established gold traders and providers to tokenize the same metal under one crypto-asset token, generating a highly liquid and stable market.
https://preview.redd.it/51wc6lb90xv11.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=1d820b95f2ff5afeea697e9c1701fb86b5f3399b
Communicate Straight to the Blockchain within the Web.
Manage your gold products Check Blockchain Transactions Vote to elect the gold mines Top 50 Cryptocurrencies available 85 Currencies supported Live trading Fast Execution 10 technical indicators Detailed Market analysis Updated News SHA512 Security encryption Multi-platform available
😍 Join the revolution in crypto gold -> https://karatcoin.dreammy.io/register
Visit our website: https://karatcoin.co
White Paper: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/karatcoin.co/files/docs/KC_WP.pdf
#bitcoin #cryptocurrency #Ethereum #GOLD #ICO #EOS #cryptofever #CryptoNews

submitted by DBlackMoon to CryptoICONews [link] [comments]

Incentives to run full nodes | odinn | Oct 04 2015

odinn on Oct 04 2015:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hello,
Some background on this....
A very long while ago I posted to the bitcoin-development mailing list
some ABIS concepts having to do with microdonations:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2013-Decembe00
3791.html
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2014-January/004
049.html
And an interesting post (which led me to explore BCN) via nullc:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7765455
(posted 1 & 1/3 year ago).
Anyway, some long while ago this discussion came up about "Incentives
to run full nodes," and the last post in the thread was here:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2014-June/006083
.html
Since that time, some new developments have come to light which the
participants in that thread may find interesting;
Please see in part,
https://bytecoin.org/news/bytecoin-wallet-1.0.8-release-introduces-micro
This presents a working implementation in BCN; the concept as
implemented there is arguably viable in BTC as well.
Please explore, play with, discuss, etc.
Cheers,
odinn:
Potentially relevant...
"Incentivizing the running of full nodes"
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2014-June/0060
28
.html
(However, the issue to which I referred here is now closed)
View whole thread:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2014-June/thre
ad
.html#6028
On 08/17/2015 02:44 PM, Chris Pacia via bitcoin-dev wrote:
On Aug 17, 2015 5:29 PM, "Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev"
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> wrote: From the
point of view of a
wallet, it's not very secure to use Hearn-style SPV mode, and
volunteers running full nodes doesn't help things. Sybil
attacking the IP address space is pretty easy in comparison to
aquiring hashing power sufficient to create false
confirmations, so any attacker able to do the former will
likely be running the full node you're connecting too anyway.
Ultimately, Hearn-style SPV is a close approximation to just
trusting anyone with a non-trivial amount of hashing power.
(and getting that is surprisingly easy, e.g. w/ SPV mining)
Can you explain how the spv node fails against an attacker with a
non-trivial amount of hash power where a full node doesn't? To
attack an spv wallet that is waiting for 6 or 10 confirmations,
you would not only need to Sybil them but also summon a massive
amount of hashing power to create a chain of headers (while
forgoing the opportunity to mine valid blocks with that hash
power).
But could someone with that much hash power not Sybil a full
node and give them a chain for valid blocks (but on an orphan
fork)? The failure model doesn't seem specific to spv to me.
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev
mailing list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
http://abis.io ~
"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
https://keybase.io/odinn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWEMsvAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CcU8IAMJ+ZYMFzjETUDEZNyUnVd3v
SJCNauufTOcqxLzQoGIj4Y66PDnk9doRy/KJUGhKNtg4vjxiEk+GGHRH02ktvnQB
6MGuDCJS+MLeGi2W2QMr1NdHl09kRo306F5ZgjtZnOqX0mhwhOrIUylpoevcBnSQ
maJ5hpmxqyhxozEyYyu50HwcMQrXeWKZ8G0VSkTqmY5wf0s98MGrFLWSujwsva0e
p4hvG6YgBH85ne7dnBSH/sySreJpRMA0aac/+1j9U3LVvMTsmuaPc71aGI791o/y
+KV+UZ8bgHldfi+NSK8wA4eRi4JQrt+ruE63XlfYl29gWINqsGeVtpW/W3jeDnI=
=KDER
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
original: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-Octobe011359.html
submitted by dev_list_bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

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
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)
    • #10144 d947afc Prioritisetransaction wasn't always updating ancestor fee (sdaftuar)
    • #10204 3c79602 Rename disconnectnode argument (jnewbery)

Block and transaction handling

    • #10126 0b5e162 Compensate for memory peak at flush time (sipa)
    • #9912 fc3d7db Optimize GetWitnessHash() for non-segwit transactions (sdaftuar)
    • #10133 ab864d3 Clean up calculations of pcoinsTip memory usage (morcos)

P2P protocol and network code

    • #9953/#10013 d2548a4 Fix shutdown hang with >= 8 -addnodes set (TheBlueMatt)
    • #10176 30fa231 net: gracefully handle NodeId wrapping (theuni)

Build system

  • - #9973 e9611d1 depends: fix zlib build on osx (theuni)

GUI

  • - #10060 ddc2dd1 Ensure an item exists on the rpcconsole stack before adding (achow101)

Mining

    • #9955/#10006 569596c Don't require segwit in getblocktemplate for segwit signalling or mining (sdaftuar)
    • #9959/#10127 b5c3440 Prevent slowdown in CreateNewBlock on large mempools (sdaftuar)

Tests and QA

  • - #10157 55f641c Fix the mempool_packages.py test (sdaftuar)

Miscellaneous

    • #10037 4d8e660 Trivial: Fix typo in help getrawtransaction RPC (keystrike)
    • #10120 e4c9a90 util: Work around (virtual) memory exhaustion on 32-bit w/ glibc (laanwj)
    • #10130 ecc5232 bitcoin-tx input verification (awemany, jnewbery)
Credits

Thanks to everyone who directly contributed to this release:
    • Alex Morcos
    • Andrew Chow
    • Awemany
    • Cory Fields
    • Gregory Maxwell
    • James Evans
    • John Newbery
    • MarcoFalke
    • Matt Corallo
    • Pieter Wuille
    • practicalswift
    • rawodb
    • Suhas Daftuar
    • Wladimir J. van der Laan
As well as everyone that helped translating on Transifex.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJY+1YNAAoJEHSBCwEjRsmme+YIAIkJLCjimADYBJoM8bnHK2Dc
4KznlAjpXqFWb6taoSyWi+/6DtZxJF1MZm+iaDhqmTEy+ms313N2mBEd2xrSAPPL
nYf84e3tgnwq07sQmUxVZXyhZe2R+m/kgy75TTZw+bonyXwwA3384F0L8gvV5Iu+
kNNu6WggWUTvOADEFVKecgzWeT1FCYXklbNk+Z5T/YWWrKA8ATXgv45IIEKT8uI1
pqhKQxoqLM3ga7Df3VbzwXAYAOCaFzf+0nmTRoqDM5pX+FQ2hq0UM6joLnUNk2ee
G4/nsNWAKg/6eycrA7Wvawwcozr2iYAov/YDj6pEI8UoeGcOdlSh69Seb1cngHg=
=EHlY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
original: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-April/014228.html
submitted by dev_list_bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

Variable Block Size Proposal | Justin M. Wray | Aug 29 2015

Justin M. Wray on Aug 29 2015:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hey Bitcoiners!
While I am an avid Bitcoin supporter, long-term user, and have done
development work on tools and platforms surrounding Bitcoin, I have
been very busy these past few weeks and haven't had a chance to fully
(or closely) monitor the Block Size debate.
I'm familiar with the basics, and have read abstracts about the
front-running proposals (BIP 100, 101, and 102). Though I've honestly
not read those in depth either. With that said, I was driving
the other day and thought of a potential idea. I'll be clear, this is
just an idea, and I haven't fully fleshed it out. But I thought I'd
throw it out there and see what people thought.
My Goal:
Provide a variable block size that provides for sustainable, long-term
growth, and balances the block propagation, while also being mindful
of potential spam attacks.
The Proposal:
Every 2016 blocks (approximately every two weeks, at the same time the
difficulty is adjusted), the new block size parameters are calculated.
The calculation determines the average (mean) size of the past 2016
blocks. This "average" size is then doubled (200%) and used as the
maximum block size for the subsequent 2016 blocks. At any point, if
the new maximum size is calculated to be below 1MB, 1MB is used
instead (which prevents regression from our current state).
Introduce a block minimum, the minimum will be 25% of the current
maximum, calculated at the same time (that is, every 2016 blocks, at
the same time the maximum is calculated). All blocks must be at least
this size in order to be valid, for blocks that do not have enough
transactions to meet the 25%, padding will be used. This devalues the
incentive to mine empty blocks in either an attempt to deflate the
block size, or to obtain a propagation advantage. Miners will be
incentivized to include transactions, as the block must meet the
minimum. This should ensure that even miners wishing to always mine
the minimum are still confirming Bitcoin transactions.
At the block in which this is introduced the maximum would stay at 1MB
for the subsequent 2016 blocks. With the minimum being enforced of 256KB
.
Example:
* Average Block Size for the last 2016 blocks: 724KB * New Maximum: 1448KB * New Minimum: 362KB 
Example: (Regression Prevention)
* Average Block Size for the last 2016 blocks: 250KB * New Maximum: 1MB * New Minimum: 256KB 
The Future:
I believe that the 1MB regression prevention might need to be changed
in the future, to prevent a large mining population from continually
deflating the block size (and keeping us at the 1MB limit).
For this, the hard limit could be changed in the future manually,
through a process similar to the current one, though hopefully with
far less urgency and hysteria.
Another option is to add an additional calculation, preventing the new
maximum from being lower than 75% of the current maximum. This would
substantially slow down a block-size deflation attack.
Example of Block-Size Deflation Attack Prevention:
This would provide a maximum growth of 200% per recalculation, but a
maximum shrinkage of 75%.
Request For Comments:
I'd love to hear your thoughts. Why wouldn't this work? What portion
is flawed? Will the miners support such a proposal? Would this even
solve the block size issue?
I will note that I don't find the 100% and 25% to be hard and fast in
my idea. Those we're just the values that initially jumped out at me.
I could easily see the minimum being anything below 50% (above 50% and
the network can never adjust to smaller block sizes). I could also see
the maximum being anything over 100%. Lastly, if a inflation attack
is a valid concern, a hard upper limit could be set (or the historical
32MB limit could remain).
I think the great part about this variable approach is that the
network can adjust to address spikes in volume and readjust once those
spikes dissipate.
Thanks!
Justin M. Wray
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org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=JthX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
original: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010708.html
submitted by bitcoin-devlist-bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

"Mining" Coins in 2140+

One of the keys of Bitcoin is that loss of the private key means loss of access to Bitcoins. Many Bitcoins have already been lost due to destruction of the private key.
Stack Exchange hypothesizes that, given advances from Moore's law (which may or may not hold, it's never been tested on this kind of timeline), the first practical cracking of a Bitcoin private key will be in 60 years. At that point, it starts being economical to target known large stashes; and, for sufficiently large stashes, it becomes more profitable to change miners from trying to mine to trying to crack private keys. Likely the Bitcoin protocol would evolve in this time to use SHA512 or something else that's invented in the meantime, so coins transferred out of those accounts would be safe for another 60 years.
Doing this cracking seems, at first blush, like theft, but I think legally (but not as a lawyer nor as someone giving legal advice), this would likely fall under the category of treasure trove. If it's been 100 years since the last Bitcoin transaction from an address, it's probably safe to assume that whoever once had access to it has lost that access, and it's now up for the taking for whoever can take it.
submitted by sulphur_gargoyle to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Core 0.13.0 release candidate 2 available | Wladimir J. van der Laan | Jul 31 2016

Wladimir J. van der Laan on Jul 31 2016:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Binaries for bitcoin Core version 0.13.0rc2 are available from:
https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.13.0/test.rc2/ 
Source code can be found on github under the signed tag
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/v0.13.0rc2 
This is a release candidate for a new major version release, bringing new
features, bug fixes, as well as other improvements.
Preliminary release notes for the release can be found at
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.13/doc/release-notes.md 
Release candidates are test versions for releases. When no critical problems
are found, this release candidate will be tagged as 0.13.0.
Please report bugs using the issue tracker at github:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues 
Notable changes since rc1:

Build system

GUI

Wallet

P2P protocol and network code

Consensus

Mining

Block and transaction handling

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJXngBiAAoJEHSBCwEjRsmmS5kIAMFiXFua9ruR8Vwu1fNgnWTb
X4tsNOdPScm7jwsFavcwygqZQlDNDURjcocQFcehHgEickBrk6eaplTuB4VJidPG
Aqw+nLrd6M//Ohy+7eke7aCg5/QV7poplM3glwow4gQfoSBvL0ywMEhWEzGL7EPH
FH5pyY9o4QZw5wGdvMWxvYVTLPZkm0W2cSWCHZ0WgzWvTkZ7aMzSQ5F5TXPfjzED
DNuQQRMm9H1H3LJkmWAwjCXLzKNMzjmefLujyEII388s6UoWnA1ufosqb1kMqL+h
kuEelzef4cMBZEvHgfzsvlLmba2DLr7xhwudd3HK2NHSmO/wAUdhbQOQSts9NoY=
=rN68
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
original: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-July/012916.html
submitted by dev_list_bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Core 0.13.0 release candidate 3 available | Wladimir J. van der Laan | Aug 13 2016

Wladimir J. van der Laan on Aug 13 2016:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Binaries for bitcoin Core version 0.13.0rc3 are available from:
https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.13.0/test.rc3/ 
Source code can be found on github under the signed tag
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/v0.13.0rc3 
This is a release candidate for a new major version release, bringing new
features, bug fixes, as well as other improvements.
Preliminary release notes for the release can be found at
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.13/doc/release-notes.md 
Release candidates are test versions for releases. When no critical problems
are found, this release candidate will be tagged as 0.13.0.
Please report bugs using the issue tracker at github:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues 
Notable changes since rc2:

Block and transaction handling

Tests and QA

Mining

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJXrsS5AAoJEHSBCwEjRsmmH1oH/3PKk2rJIgMhsf4a8fuGJD7H
+j+ugsdRpjRGK8XKgnCisLQ8UJc2Z7dRbRYfdUb1ibkkCccMQJdmS6JAahWTe+Hb
N8GbODwZ5m4LrP2PA1gqNE/pwix/pqBY4GfR+TxXEbegNUNYDkvUzeUidcYGMAZd
LEAFrVnvsTAOQiwK3/pwa+sdWVNc0Jx/hHSZhouUtFmaqjXdg5M8ShmnRjyhVovI
GeuJ2s/3+uMtIX0g+kIOv16e0qYHJtIJMexMV5x4x1oWpXMYi2YeVDFSAkcKxA/z
5JOqlhDBK2lVMOKw8kYcNXKpvhXg9UBKImJDS0S4Bye8nMLQC6VEnkscOd7bupU=
=ae21
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
original: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-August/013001.html
submitted by dev_list_bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

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)

Validation

    • #7821 4226aac init: allow shutdown during 'Activating best chain...' (laanwj)
    • #7835 46898e7 Version 2 transactions remain non-standard until CSV activates (sdaftuar)

Build system

    • #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)

Wallet

  • - #7715 19866c1 Fix calculation of balances and available coins. (morcos)

Miscellaneous

    • #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:
    • accraze
    • Alex Morcos
    • BtcDrak
    • Jonas Schnelli
    • Luke Dashjr
    • MarcoFalke
    • Mark Friedenbach
    • NicolasDorier
    • Pieter Wuille
    • Suhas Daftuar
    • 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
submitted by dev_list_bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

Why does Bitcoin use SHA-256? (FAQ) SHA256 Code Animation Scam - Hashvision.io SHA-2 Cryptographic Hash Function Hash Fucker X V1.0 By D3rkknight

Over the last year, cryptocurrencies have lost a lot of value yet bitcoin miners continue to process transactions and earn block rewards. A bunch of new The top mining devices that process between ... SHA-512 ist eine Funktion des kryptographischen Algorithmus SHA-2, der eine Weiterentwicklung des berühmten SHA-1 ist.. SHA-512 ist Sha-256 sehr ähnlich, außer dass es 1024 Bits "Blöcke" verwendet und als Eingabe eine maximale Länge von 2^128 Bits akzeptiert. SHA-512 hat auch andere algorithmische Modifikationen im Vergleich zu Sha-256. SHA-512 Algorithmus Übersicht [] Mining; Creation of Bitcoin addressess; Mining. Mining is a process by which new coins are introduced into the existing circulating supply of the Bitcoin protocol, as well as a method used to secure the Bitcoin network. For an individual to be eligible to add a block to the Bitcoin blockchain, they must first operate what is known as a mining node. Upon successfully setting up a mining node ... Strangely, an implementation of SHA512 using SSE2 optimizations was present in the Bitcoin 0.1 codebase itself, but not one for SHA256. The SHA512 does not implement 4-WAY scan because SHA512 is not used for mining. From Speculation to Evidence. Patoshi’s pattern research revealed that Patoshi only scanned a subset of the nonces. We can describe this restriction as a reduction of a single ... SHA-256 wird in verschiedenen Teilen des Bitcoin-Netzwerks verwendet: Beim Mining wird SHA-256 als Proof-of-Work-Algorithmus verwendet. SHA-256 wird bei der Erstellung von Bitcoin-Adressen verwendet, um die Sicherheit und den Datenschutz zu verbessern. Siehe auch auf BitcoinWiki . Cloud Mining; Satoshi Nakamoto; Ressourcen

[index] [41334] [49991] [49216] [50173] [23506] [32355] [48482] [31383] [33863] [14634]

Why does Bitcoin use SHA-256? (FAQ)

Bitcoins are mined using a cryptographic algorithm called SHA-256. This algorithm is simple enough to be done with pencil and paper, as I show in this video.... Mining Bitcoin with Excel - Duration: 7:17. Knowledge 180,347 views. 7:17. SHA-256 The Center Of Bitcoin - Andreas M. Antonopoulos - Duration: 1:22:48. Crypto Current 2,985 views. 1:22:48 . What ... Mining Bitcoin with pencil and paper - Duration: 7:52. Ken Shirriff Recommended for you. 7:52. Compute digest using SHA256 Algorithm in java - Duration: 5:20. Admin S 3,973 views. 5:20 . How to ... Scam!! - A New Vision of Cloud Mining Independent and unlimited Bitcoin Mining for everyone at an affordable price and with lifelong profits. Start without barriers immediately and get 150 GH/s ... SHA1,SHA256,SHA384,SHA512 Şifreleme (Metot Kullanarak ) - C# FormApp - Duration: 14:19. ÖRNEKLERLE YAZILIM 78 views. 14:19. How To Setup Gekko Science 2Pac USB Mining Bitcoin Algorithm SHA 256 ...

#