The Art of Managing Multiple Bitcoin Wallets

BitcoinPrivate

[link]

Bitcoin Private

Bitcoin Private making Bitcoin faster, more decentralised and private.
[link]

Bitcoin Private

A subreddit to discuss Bitcoin Private. Like Bitcoin, but Private.
[link]

Bitcoin wallet. Hard to steal "sand watches" concept.

Anyone familiar with bitcoin probably knows well enough its current biggest problems. One of which is bitcoin wallet security. You can take all sorts of security measures, whether its anti-virus software, offline linux based devices, paper and other non-digital versions of wallets. But there is always a chance that someone could eventually steal it, no matter how hard you hide it.
Is there anything we could do to prevent that from happening? I say yes there is. And here's what I think: Since whatever happens to your wallet, if it gets stolen eventually someone would try to send the money off of it, so your bitcoins are limited to bitcoin blockchain anyways. And here comes the catch. You could limit access to your bitcoins not only by securing the wallet file/private key in space continuum, but also in time. No, I'm not suggesting time travel, but something close enough. Imagine you can stall or set an exact time it takes to withdraw bitcoins from your wallet, right when you set it up the first time. Just enough time for you to cancel the transaction which is about to take place, in case your wallet has been compromised, and even send all your coins to another wallet without using a compromised password. You could argue that such system could be cracked offline, or the burglar could imitate emergency reallocation of funds. But we already know that the most secure system available to us is blockchain. Since bitcoins are to precious to be used to secure other bitcoins, alternative crypto-currency could be used for that purpose - namecoins. It could be anything else, but namecoins receive the benefits of bitcoin security, since they can be merge mined (that is mined at the same time with bitcoins without additional effort and have same level of network security). Namecoin wallet could be merged with bitcoin wallet to provide the latter with security in such a way, that any bitcoin transaction will result in a number of namecoin transactions first, one every few minutes (or hours), using insignificant amount of namecoins. For example, if you set your wallet to send the actual bitcoins only after 2 hours after the request, it would send namecoins 6 times every 20 minutes first, to a predefined namecoin address. The amount of namecoins sent in those transactions could be a pseudo random generated number so the bitcoin wallet can identify it with a particular bitcoin transaction about to commence (kind of an OTP pass generated by namecoind for the bitcoind). EDIT: this is to avoid faking the time change, if the wallet went offline for some time after the transaction initiation. Timestamped transactions in namecoin blockchain should avoid that issue.
If someone stole your wallet and trying to get bitcoins off your wallet, then you'd have 2 hours to cancel that transaction by sending namecoins (from any wallet) to a predefined address. You could even have a list of "options". Lets say, you have a number of wallets stored in different places in various forms and you know that some of them are still safe. You send a specific amount of namecoins to a predefined namecoin address (For example 0.2384 nmc, amount is used like a PIN number) and as soon as your stolen wallet identifies that transaction as confirmed it sends bitcoins straight away to your safe wallet. You could have a few wallets set up like that. I believe it would be wise to make those predefined namecoin addresses unchangeable and encrypted very hard, without possibility to recover the pass used.
This concept might have a flaw and of course not perfect. You could have all your alternative wallets compromised too and no way to recover your btc, but at least it gives you time to act upon the theft, BEFORE it actually happens. I'm not a security expert or an IT developer, but this idea came across my mind and I'm sharing it with you guys, in hopes that it might be useful. I don't know if its possible to implement it in the actual software (but it should be). I think when it comes to big money, the wallet should have at least something like this, I'd set it up for 24 hours at least for the transaction to go through. And have a normal wallet for day to day purchases =)
submitted by BlackPrapor to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

How would I fork Bitcoin's current v0.9.2.1 release to make a wallet-only Namecoin-compatible client that supports merged mining?

Is it as easy as changing the port, irc bootstrap and message header? If so, where would I look in the code for those areas?
According to https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin
The protocol differences from bitcoin include:
Now that list seems a tad incomplete to me. As I thought Namecoin added the getworkaux RPC call as well? I don't think bitcoin has getworkaux implemented because they're not the auxillary chain, we are.
What am I after is a Namecoin wallet that is presumably more secure (because there have been more eyes looking at the bitcoin code over the last few years compared to the namecoin code) albeit with limited Namecoin functionality.
submitted by neuPool to Namecoin [link] [comments]

How would I fork Bitcoin's current v0.9.2.1 release to make a wallet-only Namecoin-compatible client that supports merged mining?

Is it as easy as changing the port, irc bootstrap and message header? If so, where would I look in the code for those areas?
According to https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin
The protocol differences from bitcoin include:
Now that list seems a tad incomplete to me. As I thought Namecoin added the getworkaux RPC call as well? I don't think bitcoin has getworkaux implemented because they're not the auxillary chain, we are.
What am I after is a Namecoin wallet that is presumably more secure (because there have been more eyes looking at the bitcoin code over the last few years compared to the namecoin code) albeit with limited Namecoin functionality.
submitted by neuPool to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Ledger Live adds Coin control: Here's why that matters.

Ledger Live adds Coin control: Here's why that matters.
Ledger Live version 2.11.1 (download link) adds Coin control for power users.
The coin control feature gives advanced users more granular control over their wallets. It enables them to change how and which coins are selected when making transactions. This increases their ability to manage their privacy and the network fees they will have to pay to spend their account balance.
More control over your coins

How does it work?

The account balance for Bitcoin and its derivatives consists of all the unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) in the account. You can think of UTXOs as the coins in a regular wallet. When you receive money, you collect coins in your wallet. Then, when you want to make a payment, you get to choose which coins you pick from your wallet. Do you pick the largest coins first? Or do you want to spend all the smaller value coins to lighten up your wallet? Similar considerations can be made when creating a Bitcoin or Bitcoin derivative (altcoin) transaction.
Before the Coin Control feature was released, all transactions involving Bitcoin (and altcoins) automatically selected their coins using the First-In-First-Out (FIFO) algorithm. This strategy includes the oldest coin in the account, and when the amount is not sufficient the second-oldest coin is added, and so forth.
As of Ledger Live version 2.11.1, users are able to make use of a dedicated Coin Control tool to choose the coin selection strategy and the coins that may be spent.

Using Coin control in Ledger Live

Coin control is available in Advanced options in the Send flow
  1. Click on Send, choose an account to debit, and enter a recipient address. Click on Continue.
  2. Enter an amount and click on Advanced options. You will then see: - The currently selected, default coin selection strategy: Oldest coins first (FIFO). - A toggle to enable Replace-By-Fee (RBF). - A toggle to include coins from unconfirmed, replaceable transactions.
  3. Click on Coin control. The coin control modal opens.
  4. Select a Coin selection strategy from the dropdown menu: - Oldest coins first (FIFO). This is the default strategy that spends the oldest coins first. - Minimize fees (optimize size). This strategy tries to minimize the byte size of the transaction by spending the lowest number of UTXOs. This results in a low network fee. - Minimize future fees (merge coins), This strategy includes the maximum number of inputs so that a potential future price rise does not make smaller UTXOs economically unspendable. If the price of a crypto asset increases too much, small UTXOs may become worth less than the cost of the network fees to spend them.
  5. Select which coins may not be included in the selection by unticking their checkbox. The SELECTED indicator shows which coins will be included in the transaction. By changing the selection strategy and/or coins to include, the user has precise control over which coins end up being spent. The Coins to spend and Change to return indicators show how much is spent from and returned to the account.
  6. Click on Done to return to the Send flow to verify and send the transaction.
The coin control window lets you select the strategy as well as pick the coins. Coins marked SELECTED will be included in the transaction.

Coin status

The following statuses can be displayed for a coin:
  • Coins received in a transaction with 0 confirmations without RBF enabled: PENDING
  • Coins received in a transaction with 0 confirmations with RBF enabled: REPLACEABLE
  • Coins received in a transaction with 1337 confirmations: 1337 CONFIRMATIONS
By enabling the toggle Include coins from unconfirmed, replaceable transactions, replaceable transactions can be selected in the Coin control screen.

The Privacy use case

One of the main use cases for Coin control is to protect one’s privacy. UTXOs are, unfortunately, not perfectly fungible due to their unique history on the blockchain. Therefore, users may want to spend coins from different sources without mixing them together, because this would indicate to an outside observer of the blockchain that these addresses belong to the same account. For instance, if one were to spend coins bought on a KYC exchange, which are associated with the user’s identity, together with coins bought anonymously using cash, the anonymous coins could be linked to the user’s identity.
Another example would be that you would like to prevent spending a high-value coin for smaller purchases because this would unnecessarily show the person you’re paying how much you have. This is similar to not showing the boulanger how much is on your bank account when buying a baguette.

Let us know what you think!

We are excited to release this new feature because we think it will fulfill real needs of an important part of our users. This version of Ledger Live marks an important milestone, but we will continue working on more features that our community wants.
So, we invite you to try out Coin control in Ledger Live and let us know what you think! All feedback is welcome on this thread, on ledgerwallet, and you can send suggestions or get help through our official contact form.
We'd like to close out by underlining our commitment to the Bitcoin community, and our willingness to build the best wallet ecosystem for newbies as well as for power users.
submitted by fabnormal to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Gridcoin 5.0.0.0-Mandatory "Fern" Release

https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/releases/tag/5.0.0.0
Finally! After over ten months of development and testing, "Fern" has arrived! This is a whopper. 240 pull requests merged. Essentially a complete rewrite that was started with the scraper (the "neural net" rewrite) in "Denise" has now been completed. Practically the ENTIRE Gridcoin specific codebase resting on top of the vanilla Bitcoin/Peercoin/Blackcoin vanilla PoS code has been rewritten. This removes the team requirement at last (see below), although there are many other important improvements besides that.
Fern was a monumental undertaking. We had to encode all of the old rules active for the v10 block protocol in new code and ensure that the new code was 100% compatible. This had to be done in such a way as to clear out all of the old spaghetti and ring-fence it with tightly controlled class implementations. We then wrote an entirely new, simplified ruleset for research rewards and reengineered contracts (which includes beacon management, polls, and voting) using properly classed code. The fundamentals of Gridcoin with this release are now on a very sound and maintainable footing, and the developers believe the codebase as updated here will serve as the fundamental basis for Gridcoin's future roadmap.
We have been testing this for MONTHS on testnet in various stages. The v10 (legacy) compatibility code has been running on testnet continuously as it was developed to ensure compatibility with existing nodes. During the last few months, we have done two private testnet forks and then the full public testnet testing for v11 code (the new protocol which is what Fern implements). The developers have also been running non-staking "sentinel" nodes on mainnet with this code to verify that the consensus rules are problem-free for the legacy compatibility code on the broader mainnet. We believe this amount of testing is going to result in a smooth rollout.
Given the amount of changes in Fern, I am presenting TWO changelogs below. One is high level, which summarizes the most significant changes in the protocol. The second changelog is the detailed one in the usual format, and gives you an inkling of the size of this release.

Highlights

Protocol

Note that the protocol changes will not become active until we cross the hard-fork transition height to v11, which has been set at 2053000. Given current average block spacing, this should happen around October 4, about one month from now.
Note that to get all of the beacons in the network on the new protocol, we are requiring ALL beacons to be validated. A two week (14 day) grace period is provided by the code, starting at the time of the transition height, for people currently holding a beacon to validate the beacon and prevent it from expiring. That means that EVERY CRUNCHER must advertise and validate their beacon AFTER the v11 transition (around Oct 4th) and BEFORE October 18th (or more precisely, 14 days from the actual date of the v11 transition). If you do not advertise and validate your beacon by this time, your beacon will expire and you will stop earning research rewards until you advertise and validate a new beacon. This process has been made much easier by a brand new beacon "wizard" that helps manage beacon advertisements and renewals. Once a beacon has been validated and is a v11 protocol beacon, the normal 180 day expiration rules apply. Note, however, that the 180 day expiration on research rewards has been removed with the Fern update. This means that while your beacon might expire after 180 days, your earned research rewards will be retained and can be claimed by advertising a beacon with the same CPID and going through the validation process again. In other words, you do not lose any earned research rewards if you do not stake a block within 180 days and keep your beacon up-to-date.
The transition height is also when the team requirement will be relaxed for the network.

GUI

Besides the beacon wizard, there are a number of improvements to the GUI, including new UI transaction types (and icons) for staking the superblock, sidestake sends, beacon advertisement, voting, poll creation, and transactions with a message. The main screen has been revamped with a better summary section, and better status icons. Several changes under the hood have improved GUI performance. And finally, the diagnostics have been revamped.

Blockchain

The wallet sync speed has been DRASTICALLY improved. A decent machine with a good network connection should be able to sync the entire mainnet blockchain in less than 4 hours. A fast machine with a really fast network connection and a good SSD can do it in about 2.5 hours. One of our goals was to reduce or eliminate the reliance on snapshots for mainnet, and I think we have accomplished that goal with the new sync speed. We have also streamlined the in-memory structures for the blockchain which shaves some memory use.
There are so many goodies here it is hard to summarize them all.
I would like to thank all of the contributors to this release, but especially thank @cyrossignol, whose incredible contributions formed the backbone of this release. I would also like to pay special thanks to @barton2526, @caraka, and @Quezacoatl1, who tirelessly helped during the testing and polishing phase on testnet with testing and repeated builds for all architectures.
The developers are proud to present this release to the community and we believe this represents the starting point for a true renaissance for Gridcoin!

Summary Changelog

Accrual

Changed

Most significantly, nodes calculate research rewards directly from the magnitudes in EACH superblock between stakes instead of using a two- or three- point average based on a CPID's current magnitude and the magnitude for the CPID when it last staked. For those long-timers in the community, this has been referred to as "Superblock Windows," and was first done in proof-of-concept form by @denravonska.

Removed

Beacons

Added

Changed

Removed

Unaltered

As a reminder:

Superblocks

Added

Changed

Removed

Voting

Added

Changed

Removed

Detailed Changelog

[5.0.0.0] 2020-09-03, mandatory, "Fern"

Added

Changed

Removed

Fixed

submitted by jamescowens to gridcoin [link] [comments]

August / September monthly report from v1docq47 (CCS + XRM.RU)

This is my monthly progress report (CCS.html) + XMR.RU).
Below is a list of what has been done and translated into Russian for two months of my work.

Monero Video (YouTube)

The following video posted on Monero Russian Community YouTube Channel.

Weekly News:

Short Q&A about Monero:

Monero into Russian (Translation)

The following articles / guides have been translated into Russian and posted on the XMR.RU website and my Github repository.
Note: If you would like to read the original article in English, then, open the article you are interested in, and at the end of each article you will find a link to the source.

Critical Decentralisation Cluster 36c3 (transcriptions (EN + RU) + translation (RU)):

01 - Monero Introduction (Diego "rehrar" Salazar) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 02 - RIAT Introduction (parasew) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 03 - Swiss Cryptoeconomics Assembly (polto, Ome) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 04 - Namecoin Introduction (Jeremy Rand) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 05 - Open Hardware developed at FOSSASIA (Mario Behling) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 06 - Paralelni Polis (Juraj Bednar) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 07 - Introduction to Replicant (dllud, Denis ‘GNUtoo’ Carikli)​ | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 08 - Open Source Hardware and OSHWA (Drew Fustini) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 09 - ImplicitCAD (Juila Longtin) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 10 - Program in Detail | Transcriptions - EN / RU / XMR.RU 11 - about:freedom (Bonnie Mehring, Blipp)​ | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 13 - Funding Models of FOSS (Diego “rehrar” Salazar) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 14 - The Sharp Forks We Follow​ | Transcriptions - EN / RU / XMR.RU 16 - P2P Trading in Cryptoanarchy | Transcriptions - EN / RU / XMR.RU 17 - Monero’s Adaptive Blockweight Approach to Scaling | Transcriptions - EN / RU / XMR.RU 18 - Nym (Harry Halpin)​ | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 19 - Digital Integrity of the Human Person | Transcriptions - EN / RU / XMR.RU 20 - cyber~Congress (Sergey Simanovsky) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 21 - KYC & Crypto-AML Tools (polto) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 22 - Parallel Polis, Temporary Autonomous Zones and Beyond | Transcriptions - EN / RU 23 - MandelBot:HAB - Open Source Ecotecture and Horizontalism | Transcriptions - EN / RU 24 - Adventures and Experiments Adding Namecoin to Tor Browser | Transcriptions - EN / RU 25 - Fair Data Society (Gregor Zavcer) | Transcriptions - EN.md) / RU.md) / XMR.RU 45 - Designing a Communal Computing Interface | Transcriptions - EN / RU / XMR.RU 47 - Hackatoshi’s Flying Circuit | Transcriptions - EN / RU / XMR.RU

Zero to Monero - Second Edition

https://www.overleaf.com/read/hcmqnvgtfmyh - Chapter 00 - Abstract - Chapter 01 - Introduction - Chapter 02 - Basic Concepts - Chapter 03 - Advanced Schnorr-like Signatures

Monero Outreach Articles

Getmonero.org Posts Blog

LocalMonero Articles

Note: You need "Change Language" to Russian - Why Monero Has A Tail Emission - How CLSAG Will Improve Monero's Efficiency - How Monero Solved the Block Size Problem That Plagues Bitcoin - How Ring Signatures Obscure Monero's Outputs - Monero Best Practices for Beginners - Monero Outputs Explained

Monero Meeting logs

CCS Result / Report

Monero News

Other Articles

Pull / Merge Request

Monero Project Translations (Weblate)

Thanks for your support!
submitted by v1docq47 to Monero [link] [comments]

[OWL WATCH] Waiting for "IOTA TIME" 20; Hans's re-defined directions for DLT

Disclaimer: This is my editing, so there could be some misunderstandings...
--------------------------------------------
wellwho오늘 오후 4:50
u/Ben Royce****how far is society2 from having something clickable powered by IOTA?
Ben Royce오늘 오후 4:51
demo of basic tech late sep/ early oct. MVP early 2021
---------------------------------------------------
HusQy
Colored coins are the most misunderstood upcoming feature of the IOTA protocol. A lot of people see them just as a competitor to ERC-20 tokens on ETH and therefore a way of tokenizing things on IOTA, but they are much more important because they enable "consensus on data".
Bob
All this stuff already works on neblio but decentralized and scaling to 3500 tps
HusQy
Neblio has 8 mb blocks with 30 seconds blocktime. This is a throughput of 8 mb / 30 seconds = 267 kb per second. Transactions are 401+ bytes which means that throughput is 267 kb / 401 bytes = 665 TPS. IOTA is faster, feeless and will get even faster with the next update ...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
HusQy
Which DLT would be more secure? One that is collaboratively validated by the economic actors of the world (coporations, companies, foundations, states, people) or one that is validated by an anonymous group of wealthy crypto holders?
HusQy
The problem with current DLTs is that we use protection mechanisms like Proof of Work and Proof of Stake that are inherently hard to shard. The more shards you have, the more you have to distribute your hashing power and your stake and the less secure the system becomes.
HusQy
Real world identities (i.e. all the big economic actors) however could shard into as many shards as necessary without making the system less secure. Todays DLTs waste trust in the same way as PoW wastes energy.
HusQy
Is a secure money worth anything if you can't trust the economic actors that you would buy stuff from? If you buy a car from Volkswagen and they just beat you up and throw you out of the shop after you payed then a secure money won't be useful either :P
HusQy
**I believe that if you want to make DLT work and be successful then we need to ultimately incorporate things like trust in entities into the technology.**Examples likes wirecard show that trusting a single company is problematic but trusting the economy as a whole should be at ...
**... least as secure as todays DLTs.**And as soon as you add sharding it will be orders of magnitude more secure. DLT has failed to deliver because people have tried to build a system in vacuum that completely ignores things that already exist and that you can leverage on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HusQy
Blockchain is a bit like people sitting in a room, trying to communicate through BINGO sheets. While they talk, they write down some of the things that have been said and as soon as one screams BINGO! he hands around his sheet to inform everybody about what has been said.
HusQy
If you think that this is the most efficient form of communication for people sitting in the same room and the answer to scalability is to make bigger BINGO sheets or to allow people to solve the puzzle faster then you will most probably never understand what IOTA is working on.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HusQy
**Blockchain does not work with too many equally weighted validators.****If 400 validators produce a validating statement (block) at the same time then only one can survive as part of a longest chain.**IOTA is all about collaborative validation.
**Another problem of blockchain is that every transaction gets sent twice through the network. Once from the nodes to the miners and a 2nd time from the miners as part of a block.**Blockchain will therefore always only be able to use 50% of the network throughput.
And****the last problem is that you can not arbitrarily decrease the time between blocks as it breaks down if the time between blocks gets smaller than the average network delay. The idle time between blocks is precious time that could be used for processing transactions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
HusQy
I am not talking about a system with a fixed number of validators but one that is completely open and permissionless where any new company can just spin up a node and take part in the network.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HusQy
Proof of Work and Proof of Stake are both centralizing sybil-protection mechanism. I don't think that Satoshi wanted 14 mining pools to run the network.
And "economic clustering" was always the "end game" of IOTA.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
HusQy
**Using Proof of Stake is not trustless. Proof of Stake means you trust the richest people and hope that they approve your transactions. The rich are getting richer (through your fees) and you are getting more and more dependant on them.**Is that your vision of the future?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

HusQy
Please read again exactly what I wrote. I have not spoken of introducing governance by large companies, nor have I said that IOTA should be permissioned. We aim for a network with millions or even billions of nodes.

HusQy
That can't work at all with a permissioned ledger - who should then drop off all these devices or authorize them to participate in the network? My key message was the following: Proof of Work and Proof of Stake will always be if you split them up via sharding ...

HusQy
... less secure because you simply need fewer coins or less hash power to have the majority of the votes in a shard. This is not the case with trust in society and the economy. When all companies in the world jointly secure a DLT ...

HusQy
... then these companies could install any number of servers in any number of shards without compromising security, because "trust" does not become less just because they operate several servers. First of all, that is a fact and nothing else.

HusQy
Proof of Work and Proof of Stake are contrary to the assumption of many not "trustless" but follow the maxim: "In the greed of miners we trust!" The basic assumption that the miners do not destroy the system that generates income for them is fundamental here for the ...

HusQy
... security of every DLT. I think a similar assumption would still be correct for the economy as a whole: The companies of the world (and not just the big ones) would not destroy the system with which their customers pay them. In this respect, a system would be ...

HusQy
... which is validated by society and the economy as a whole probably just as "safely" as a system which is validated by a few anonymous miners. Why a small elite of miners should be better validators than any human and ...

HusQy
... To be honest, companies in this world do not open up to me. As already written in my other thread, safe money does not bring you anything if you have to assume that Volkswagen will beat you up and throw you out of the store after you ...

HusQy
... paid for a car. The thoughts I discussed say nothing about the immediate future of IOTA (we use for Coordicide mana) but rather speak of a world where DLT has already become an integral part of our lives and we ...

HusQy
... a corresponding number of companies, non-profit organizations and people have used DLT and where such a system could be implemented. The point here is not to create a governance solution that in any way influences the development of technology ...

HusQy
... or have to give nodes their OK first, but about developing a system that enables people to freely choose the validators they trust. For example, you can also declare your grandma to be a validator when you install your node or your ...

HusQy
... local supermarket. Economic relationships in the real world usually form a close-knit network and it doesn't really matter who you follow as long as the majority is honest. I also don't understand your criticism of censorship, because something like that in IOTA ...

HusQy
... is almost impossible. Each transaction confirms two other transactions which is growing exponentially. If someone wanted to ignore a transaction, he would have to ignore an exponential number of other transactions after a very short time. In contrast to blockchain ...

HusQy
... validators in IOTA do not decide what is included in the ledger, but only decide which of several double spends should be confirmed. Honest transactions are confirmed simply by having other transactions reference them ...

HusQy
... and the "validators" are not even asked. As for the "dust problem", this is indeed something that is a bigger problem for IOTA than for other DLTs because we have no fees, but it is also not an unsolvable problem. Bitcoin initially has a ...

HusQy
Solved similar problem by declaring outputs with a minimum amount of 5430 satoshis as invalid ( github.com/Bitcoin/Bitcoi…). A similar solution where an address must contain a minimum amount is also conceivable for IOTA and we are discussing ...

HusQy
... several possibilities (including compressing dust using cryptographic methods). Contrary to your assumption, checking such a minimum amount is not slow but just as fast as checking a normal transaction. And mine ...

HusQy
... In my opinion this is no problem at all for IOTA's use case. The important thing is that you can send small amounts, but after IOTA is feeless it is also okay to expect the recipients to regularly send their payments on a ...

HusQy
... merge address. The wallets already do this automatically (sweeping) and for machines it is no problem to automate this process. So far this was not a problem because the TPS were limited but with the increased TPS throughput of ...

HusQy
... Chrysalis it becomes relevant and appropriate solutions are discussed and then implemented accordingly. I think that was the most important thing first and if you have further questions just write :)

HusQy
And to be very clear! I really appreciate you and your questions and don't see this as an attack at all! People who see such questions as inappropriate criticism should really ask whether they are still objective. I have little time at the moment because ...

HusQy
... my girlfriend is on tour and has to take care of our daughter, but as soon as she is back we can discuss these things in a video. I think that the concept of including the "real world" in the concepts of DLT is really exciting and ...

HusQy
... that would certainly be exciting to discuss in a joint video. But again, that's more of a vision than a specific plan for the immediate future. This would not work with blockchain anyway but IOTA would be compatible so why not think about such things.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

HusQy
All good my big one :P But actually not that much has changed. There has always been the concept of "economic clustering" which is basically based on similar ideas. We are just now able to implement things like this for the first time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HusQy
Exactly. It would mean that addresses "cost" something but I would rather pay a few cents than fees for each transaction. And you can "take" this minimum amount with you every time you change to a new address.

HusQy
All good my big one :P But actually not that much has changed. There has always been the concept of "economic clustering" which is basically based on similar ideas. We are just now able to implement things like this for the first time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Relax오늘 오전 1:17
Btw. Hans (sorry for interrupting this convo) but what make people say that IOTA is going the permissioned way because of your latest tweets? I don't get why some people are now forecasting that... Is it because of missing specs or do they just don't get the whole idea?

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:20
its bullshit u/Relaxan identity based system would still be open and permissionless where everybody can choose the actors that they deem trustworthy themselves but thats anyway just sth that would be applicable with more adoption
[오전 1:20]
for now we use mana as a predecessor to an actual reputation system

Sissors오늘 오전 1:31
If everybody has to choose actors they deem trustworthy, is it still permissionless? Probably will become a bit a semantic discussion, but still

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:34
Of course its permissionless you can follow your grandma if you want to :p

Sissors오늘 오전 1:36
Well sure you can, but you will need to follow something which has a majority of the voting power in the network. Nice that you follow your grandma, but if others dont, her opinion (or well her nodes opinion) is completely irrelevant

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:37
You would ideally follow the people that are trustworthy rather than your local drug dealers yeah

Sissors오늘 오전 1:38
And tbh, sure if you do it like that is easy. If you just make the users responsible for only connection to trustworthy nodes

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:38
And if your grandma follows her supermarket and some other people she deems trustworthy then thats fine as well
[오전 1:38]
+ you dont have just 1 actor that you follow

Sissors오늘 오전 1:38
No, you got a large list, since yo uwant to follow those which actually matter. So you jsut download a standard list from the internet

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:39
You can do that
[오전 1:39]
Is bitcoin permissionless? Should we both try to become miners?
[오전 1:41]
I mean miners that actually matter and not find a block every 10 trillion years 📷
[오전 1:42]
If you would want to become a validator then you would need to build up trust among other people - but anybody can still run a node and issue transactions unlike in hashgraph where you are not able to run your own nodes(수정됨)
[오전 1:48]
Proof of Stake is also not trustless - it just has a builtin mechanism that downloads the trusted people from the blockchain itself (the richest dudes)

Sissors오늘 오전 1:52
I think most agree it would be perfect if every person had one vote. Which is pr oblematic to implement of course. But I really wonder if the solution is to just let users decide who to trust. At the very least I expect a quite centralized network

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:53
of course even a trust based system would to a certain degree be centralized as not every person is equally trustworthy as for example a big cooperation
[오전 1:53]
but I think its gonna be less centralized than PoS or PoW
[오전 1:53]
but anyway its sth for "after coordicide"
[오전 1:54]
there are not enough trusted entities that are using DLT, yet to make such a system work reasonably well
[오전 1:54]
I think the reason why blockchain has not really started to look into these kind of concepts is because blockchain doesnt work with too many equally weighted validators
[오전 1:56]
I believe that DLT is only going to take over the world if it is actually "better" than existing systems and with better I mean cheaper, more secure and faster and PoS and PoW will have a very hard time to deliver that
[오전 1:56]
especially if you consider that its not only going to settle value transfers

Relax오늘 오전 1:57
I like this clear statements, it makes it really clear that DLT is still in its infancy

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:57
currently bank transfers are order of magnitude cheaper than BTC or ETH transactions

Hans Moog [IF]오늘 오전 1:57
and we you think that people will adopt it just because its crypto then I think we are mistaken
[오전 1:57]
The tech needs to actually solve a problem
[오전 1:57]
and tbh. currently people use PayPal and other companies to settle their payments
[오전 1:58]
having a group of the top 500 companies run such a service together is already much better(수정됨)
[오전 1:58]
especially if its fast and feeless
[오전 2:02]
and the more people use it, the more decentralized it actually becomes
[오전 2:02]
because you have more trustworthy entities to choose of

Evaldas [IF]오늘 오전 2:08
"in the greed of miners we trust"


submitted by btlkhs to Iota [link] [comments]

Had some thoughts on economics.

This is how I've been doing things in my Digital Perdition chronicle / narrative for Shadowrun for years. If this is useful, feel free to steal it.
I assume this probably isn't a new idea, but in my world, Nuyen is a form of cryptocurrency, like bitcoin or ethereum. It's also a "smart" currency, in that it can autonomously do things, all by itself. Any "nuyen app" on any comlink can, with a very simple user-facing interface, create things like escrows, trusts, provisional holdings, task verified transactions, etc. As long as the system can autonomously verify the information some how in the outside world, it can interact with it. (This also means the system is somewhat fallible and can be hacked / spoofed / fooled, which can lead to interesting emergent narratives / plots all on its own).
The fact that it's a cryptocurrency also informs the logic of what happens if Nuyen is copied. Ordinarily, this doesn't happen, and "naked nuyen" (nucoin outside of a wallet app or not encrypted on a credstick) is very suspicious, and if you're going to accept it, you need to be able to verrify it in real time, like right now, and transfer it to your account before you leave this dark alley / a abandoned warehouse transaction, or not accept it at all if you don't have signal. But if you do some how manage to clone some Nuyen, then just like crypto, and there's two of the exact same nucoin, then it's whoever syncs it to their account first. The other is considered the forgery. So that can create a "race against the clock" scenario if two opposing forces have the bag, the same bag, and need to get back to civilization before the other guy does. (This might not even come up in your games, but I play in a lot of areas like, in the middle of the ocean, pirates and atolls, as well as extremely rural northern Canada, South American jungles, and sub-Saharian Africa, exploring ancient blood mage / cultist desert ruins, etc, so often, "spotty signal" is an environmental hurdle / plot point.)
We also have "credcoins" in addition to regular old credsticks.
A "credcoin" is basically like an SD card, but with a poker-chip style plastic housing around it, to make it more handleable. The chip holds the actual encrypted nucoin (like a credstick) so they're not naked nuyen (see above), but they've also got an optical code, like a QR code, printed on them. They can be used in vending machines in 3rd world areas where signal might be spotty, or traded in physical transactions.
The way they work, is that we've written into the narrative that a certain block of numbers in the "nuyen hash" of each nucoin, maybe like the last five digits or something, who knows, but that there's a world wide industry standard number to indicate that these nuyen are dedicated for physical use. Sort of like how some IP addresses are reserved for localhost or LAN. If any system, any wallet app, sees these digits, it wont let them be "deposited". Only a physical bank can do it. This prevents someone from just scanning a credcoin, depositing the nuyen, and now the coins still look valid, but are useless. If you wanted to "deposit" them, you'd take them to a bank, they would scan them and verify, add them to your account, and remove those coins from circulation immediately by physically destroying them (or feeding them into a hopper to be able to 3d print new ones). They'd also charge you a fee for the overhead of the cost of actually producing currency, sort of like those CoinStar machines at Walmart that charge you a fee for counting all your change.
Speaking of counting change... That there's an optical code on credcoins makes that easy, too. Anyone with AR (augmented reality -- so basically, anyone, even if it's only through a hand held comlink screen, but usually AR contact lenses, glasses, goggles, or cybereyes) can just look at a credcoin and immediately know how much it is. You can also dump them out on the table, stand back so you get them all in frame, and just see a total for how much the value of all of them are. Each credcoin already has an ARO, but if there's a shit load of them together in close proximity, the AROs just merge together into a single one so as not to be "spammy". If you want to block the AROs, you can store your credcoins in signal blocking bags, containers, or metal coin rolls. Credcoins are also slightly different sizes and colors to tell the denomination at a glance, as well.
Anyway, I hope some of those ideas are useful for your games. :)
submitted by Cronyx to Shadowrun [link] [comments]

Help

Currently using blockchain. New to crypto and bitcoin. I got money into my wallet but for some reason when i went to send the coin it said insuffecient funds. So added more money but added a seperate wallet how do you merge them or whats the process. Thanks much appreciated.
submitted by LegitimateCondition7 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

To Kill a Mockingbird Yaoi Plagiarism Debunked

What we see in chapter 13 with the "Intimacy" between Android Atticus and Human Atticus is very much not plagiarism of Android 17 and Human 17 yaoi from LGBTQ DBZ Tumblr.
Although there are many similarities between the two, thematically and graphically at least as described in the book, clearly the Android / Human scene in Mockingbird is describing something altogether not sexual. Clearly it is in reference to the human merging with the technological.
Lee famously authored many scholarly articles about the role that AI would play in the American justice system in a post-literate future. She theorized, quite prophetically, that robots would inevitably become custodians of justice, because they are the height of impartiality.
Which is clearly what that scene is describing: Human Atticus is, rather than thrusting in a sexual manner, literally thrusting his custodianship of the law of men into Android Atticus, giving him the seeds of justice and the legal code for Android Atticus to improve upon with his computer mind and immortal body.
I have written a book defending against these accusations which I will send you if you send me $50 in Bitcoin to my Bitcoin wallet. It's called Falsely Smeared: Defending Harper Lee's Works Against Accusations of Plagiarizing From Yaoi.
submitted by ElegantMarzipan to copypasta [link] [comments]

Syscoin Platform’s Great Reddit Scaling Bake-off Proposal

Syscoin Platform’s Great Reddit Scaling Bake-off Proposal

https://preview.redd.it/rqt2dldyg8e51.jpg?width=1044&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=777ae9d4fbbb54c3540682b72700fc4ba3de0a44
We are excited to participate and present Syscoin Platform's ideal characteristics and capabilities towards a well-rounded Reddit Community Points solution!
Our scaling solution for Reddit Community Points involves 2-way peg interoperability with Ethereum. This will provide a scalable token layer built specifically for speed and high volumes of simple value transfers at a very low cost, while providing sovereign ownership and onchain finality.
Token transfers scale by taking advantage of a globally sorting mempool that provides for probabilistically secure assumptions of “as good as settled”. The opportunity here for token receivers is to have an app-layer interactivity on the speed/security tradeoff (99.9999% assurance within 10 seconds). We call this Z-DAG, and it achieves high-throughput across a mesh network topology presently composed of about 2,000 geographically dispersed full-nodes. Similar to Bitcoin, however, these nodes are incentivized to run full-nodes for the benefit of network security, through a bonded validator scheme. These nodes do not participate in the consensus of transactions or block validation any differently than other nodes and therefore do not degrade the security model of Bitcoin’s validate first then trust, across every node. Each token transfer settles on-chain. The protocol follows Bitcoin core policies so it has adequate code coverage and protocol hardening to be qualified as production quality software. It shares a significant portion of Bitcoin’s own hashpower through merged-mining.
This platform as a whole can serve token microtransactions, larger settlements, and store-of-value in an ideal fashion, providing probabilistic scalability whilst remaining decentralized according to Bitcoin design. It is accessible to ERC-20 via a permissionless and trust-minimized bridge that works in both directions. The bridge and token platform are currently available on the Syscoin mainnet. This has been gaining recent attention for use by loyalty point programs and stablecoins such as Binance USD.

Solutions

Syscoin Foundation identified a few paths for Reddit to leverage this infrastructure, each with trade-offs. The first provides the most cost-savings and scaling benefits at some sacrifice of token autonomy. The second offers more preservation of autonomy with a more narrow scope of cost savings than the first option, but savings even so. The third introduces more complexity than the previous two yet provides the most overall benefits. We consider the third as most viable as it enables Reddit to benefit even while retaining existing smart contract functionality. We will focus on the third option, and include the first two for good measure.
  1. Distribution, burns and user-to-user transfers of Reddit Points are entirely carried out on the Syscoin network. This full-on approach to utilizing the Syscoin network provides the most scalability and transaction cost benefits of these scenarios. The tradeoff here is distribution and subscription handling likely migrating away from smart contracts into the application layer.
  2. The Reddit Community Points ecosystem can continue to use existing smart contracts as they are used today on the Ethereum mainchain. Users migrate a portion of their tokens to Syscoin, the scaling network, to gain much lower fees, scalability, and a proven base layer, without sacrificing sovereign ownership. They would use Syscoin for user-to-user transfers. Tips redeemable in ten seconds or less, a high-throughput relay network, and onchain settlement at a block target of 60 seconds.
  3. Integration between Matic Network and Syscoin Platform - similar to Syscoin’s current integration with Ethereum - will provide Reddit Community Points with EVM scalability (including the Memberships ERC777 operator) on the Matic side, and performant simple value transfers, robust decentralized security, and sovereign store-of-value on the Syscoin side. It’s “the best of both worlds”. The trade-off is more complex interoperability.

Syscoin + Matic Integration

Matic and Blockchain Foundry Inc, the public company formed by the founders of Syscoin, recently entered a partnership for joint research and business development initiatives. This is ideal for all parties as Matic Network and Syscoin Platform provide complementary utility. Syscoin offers characteristics for sovereign ownership and security based on Bitcoin’s time-tested model, and shares a significant portion of Bitcoin’s own hashpower. Syscoin’s focus is on secure and scalable simple value transfers, trust-minimized interoperability, and opt-in regulatory compliance for tokenized assets rather than scalability for smart contract execution. On the other hand, Matic Network can provide scalable EVM for smart contract execution. Reddit Community Points can benefit from both.
Syscoin + Matic integration is actively being explored by both teams, as it is helpful to Reddit, Ethereum, and the industry as a whole.

Proving Performance & Cost Savings

Our POC focuses on 100,000 on-chain settlements of token transfers on the Syscoin Core blockchain. Transfers and burns perform equally with Syscoin. For POCs related to smart contracts (subscriptions, etc), refer to the Matic Network proposal.
On-chain settlement of 100k transactions was accomplished within roughly twelve minutes, well-exceeding Reddit’s expectation of five days. This was performed using six full-nodes operating on compute-optimized AWS c4.2xlarge instances which were geographically distributed (Virginia, London, Sao Paulo Brazil, Oregon, Singapore, Germany). A higher quantity of settlements could be reached within the same time-frame with more broadcasting nodes involved, or using hosts with more resources for faster execution of the process.
Addresses used: 100,014
The demonstration was executed using this tool. The results can be seen in the following blocks:
612722: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/6d47796d043bb4c508d29123e6ae81b051f5e0aaef849f253c8f3a6942a022ce
612723: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/8e2077f743461b90f80b4bef502f564933a8e04de97972901f3d65cfadcf1faf
612724: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/205436d25b1b499fce44c29567c5c807beaca915b83cc9f3c35b0d76dbb11f6e
612725: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/776d1b1a0f90f655a6bbdf559ff5072459cbdc5682d7615ff4b78c00babdc237
612726: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/de4df0994253742a1ac8ac9eec8d2a8c8b0a6d72c53d6f3caa29bb6c171b0a6b
612727: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/e5e167c52a9decb313fbaadf49a5e34cb490f8084f642a850385476d4ef10d70
612728: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/ab64d989edc71890e7b5b8491c20e9a27520dc45a5f7c776d3dae79057f59fe7
612729: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/5e8b7ecd0e36f99d07e4ea6e135fc952bf7ec30164ab6f4d1e98b0f2d405df6d
612730: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/d395df3d31dde60bbb0bece6bd5b358297da878f0beb96be389e5f0e043580a3
It is important to note that this POC is not focused on Z-DAG. The performance of Z-DAG has been benchmarked within realistic network conditions: Whiteblock’s audit is publicly available. Network latency tests showed an average TPS around 15k with burst capacity up to 61k. Zero-latency control group exhibited ~150k TPS. Mainnet testing of the Z-DAG network is achievable and will require further coordination and additional resources.
Even further optimizations are expected in the upcoming Syscoin Core release which will implement a UTXO model for our token layer bringing further efficiency as well as open the door to additional scaling technology currently under research by our team and academic partners. At present our token layer is account-based, similar to Ethereum. Opt-in compliance structures will also be introduced soon which will offer some positive performance characteristics as well. It makes the most sense to implement these optimizations before performing another benchmark for Z-DAG, especially on the mainnet considering the resources required to stress-test this network.

Cost Savings

Total cost for these 100k transactions: $0.63 USD
See the live fee comparison for savings estimation between transactions on Ethereum and Syscoin. Below is a snapshot at time of writing:
ETH price: $318.55 ETH gas price: 55.00 Gwei ($0.37)
Syscoin price: $0.11
Snapshot of live fee comparison chart
Z-DAG provides a more efficient fee-market. A typical Z-DAG transaction costs 0.0000582 SYS. Tokens can be safely redeemed/re-spent within seconds or allowed to settle on-chain beforehand. The costs should remain about this low for microtransactions.
Syscoin will achieve further reduction of fees and even greater scalability with offchain payment channels for assets, with Z-DAG as a resilience fallback. New payment channel technology is one of the topics under research by the Syscoin development team with our academic partners at TU Delft. In line with the calculation in the Lightning Networks white paper, payment channels using assets with Syscoin Core will bring theoretical capacity for each person on Earth (7.8 billion) to have five on-chain transactions per year, per person, without requiring anyone to enter a fee market (aka “wait for a block”). This exceeds the minimum LN expectation of two transactions per person, per year; one to exist on-chain and one to settle aggregated value.

Tools, Infrastructure & Documentation

Syscoin Bridge

Mainnet Demonstration of Syscoin Bridge with the Basic Attention Token ERC-20
A two-way blockchain interoperability system that uses Simple Payment Verification to enable:
  • Any Standard ERC-20 token to be moved from Ethereum to the Syscoin blockchain as a Syscoin Platform Token (SPT), and back to Ethereum
  • Any SPT to be moved from Syscoin to the Ethereum blockchain as an ERC-20 token, and back to Syscoin

Benefits

  • Permissionless
  • No counterparties involved
  • No trading mechanisms involved
  • No third-party liquidity providers required
  • Cross-chain Fractional Supply - 2-way peg - Token supply maintained globally
  • ERC-20s gain vastly improved transactionality with the Syscoin Token Platform, along with the security of bitcoin-core-compliant PoW.
  • SPTs gain access to all the tooling, applications and capabilities of Ethereum for ERC-20, including smart contracts.
https://preview.redd.it/l8t2m8ldh8e51.png?width=1180&format=png&auto=webp&s=b0a955a0181746dc79aff718bd0bf607d3c3aa23
https://preview.redd.it/26htnxzfh8e51.png?width=1180&format=png&auto=webp&s=d0383d3c2ee836c9f60b57eca35542e9545f741d

Source code

https://github.com/syscoin/?q=sysethereum
Main Subprojects

API

Tools to simplify using Syscoin Bridge as a service with dapps and wallets will be released some time after implementation of Syscoin Core 4.2. These will be based upon the same processes which are automated in the current live Sysethereum Dapp that is functioning with the Syscoin mainnet.

Documentation

Syscoin Bridge & How it Works (description and process flow)
Superblock Validation Battles
HOWTO: Provision the Bridge for your ERC-20
HOWTO: Setup an Agent
Developer & User Diligence

Trade-off

The Syscoin Ethereum Bridge is secured by Agent nodes participating in a decentralized and incentivized model that involves roles of Superblock challengers and submitters. This model is open to participation. The benefits here are trust-minimization, permissionless-ness, and potentially less legal/regulatory red-tape than interop mechanisms that involve liquidity providers and/or trading mechanisms.
The trade-off is that due to the decentralized nature there are cross-chain settlement times of one hour to cross from Ethereum to Syscoin, and three hours to cross from Syscoin to Ethereum. We are exploring ways to reduce this time while maintaining decentralization via zkp. Even so, an “instant bridge” experience could be provided by means of a third-party liquidity mechanism. That option exists but is not required for bridge functionality today. Typically bridges are used with batch value, not with high frequencies of smaller values, and generally it is advantageous to keep some value on both chains for maximum availability of utility. Even so, the cross-chain settlement time is good to mention here.

Cost

Ethereum -> Syscoin: Matic or Ethereum transaction fee for bridge contract interaction, negligible Syscoin transaction fee for minting tokens
Syscoin -> Ethereum: Negligible Syscoin transaction fee for burning tokens, 0.01% transaction fee paid to Bridge Agent in the form of the ERC-20, Matic or Ethereum transaction fee for contract interaction.

Z-DAG

Zero-Confirmation Directed Acyclic Graph is an instant settlement protocol that is used as a complementary system to proof-of-work (PoW) in the confirmation of Syscoin service transactions. In essence, a Z-DAG is simply a directed acyclic graph (DAG) where validating nodes verify the sequential ordering of transactions that are received in their memory pools. Z-DAG is used by the validating nodes across the network to ensure that there is absolute consensus on the ordering of transactions and no balances are overflowed (no double-spends).

Benefits

  • Unique fee-market that is more efficient for microtransaction redemption and settlement
  • Uses decentralized means to enable tokens with value transfer scalability that is comparable or exceeds that of credit card networks
  • Provides high throughput and secure fulfillment even if blocks are full
  • Probabilistic and interactive
  • 99.9999% security assurance within 10 seconds
  • Can serve payment channels as a resilience fallback that is faster and lower-cost than falling-back directly to a blockchain
  • Each Z-DAG transaction also settles onchain through Syscoin Core at 60-second block target using SHA-256 Proof of Work consensus
https://preview.redd.it/pgbx84jih8e51.png?width=1614&format=png&auto=webp&s=5f631d42a33dc698365eb8dd184b6d442def6640

Source code

https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin

API

Syscoin-js provides tooling for all Syscoin Core RPCs including interactivity with Z-DAG.

Documentation

Z-DAG White Paper
Useful read: An in-depth Z-DAG discussion between Syscoin Core developer Jag Sidhu and Brave Software Research Engineer Gonçalo Pestana

Trade-off

Z-DAG enables the ideal speed/security tradeoff to be determined per use-case in the application layer. It minimizes the sacrifice required to accept and redeem fast transfers/payments while providing more-than-ample security for microtransactions. This is supported on the premise that a Reddit user receiving points does need security yet generally doesn’t want nor need to wait for the same level of security as a nation-state settling an international trade debt. In any case, each Z-DAG transaction settles onchain at a block target of 60 seconds.

Syscoin Specs

Syscoin 3.0 White Paper
(4.0 white paper is pending. For improved scalability and less blockchain bloat, some features of v3 no longer exist in current v4: Specifically Marketplace Offers, Aliases, Escrow, Certificates, Pruning, Encrypted Messaging)
  • 16MB block bandwidth per minute assuming segwit witness carrying transactions, and transactions ~200 bytes on average
  • SHA256 merge mined with Bitcoin
  • UTXO asset layer, with base Syscoin layer sharing identical security policies as Bitcoin Core
  • Z-DAG on asset layer, bridge to Ethereum on asset layer
  • On-chain scaling with prospect of enabling enterprise grade reliable trustless payment processing with on/offchain hybrid solution
  • Focus only on Simple Value Transfers. MVP of blockchain consensus footprint is balances and ownership of them. Everything else can reduce data availability in exchange for scale (Ethereum 2.0 model). We leave that to other designs, we focus on transfers.
  • Future integrations of MAST/Taproot to get more complex value transfers without trading off trustlessness or decentralization.
  • Zero-knowledge Proofs are a cryptographic new frontier. We are dabbling here to generalize the concept of bridging and also verify the state of a chain efficiently. We also apply it in our Digital Identity projects at Blockchain Foundry (a publicly traded company which develops Syscoin softwares for clients). We are also looking to integrate privacy preserving payment channels for off-chain payments through zkSNARK hub & spoke design which does not suffer from the HTLC attack vectors evident on LN. Much of the issues plaguing Lightning Network can be resolved using a zkSNARK design whilst also providing the ability to do a multi-asset payment channel system. Currently we found a showstopper attack (American Call Option) on LN if we were to use multiple-assets. This would not exist in a system such as this.

Wallets

Web3 and mobile wallets are under active development by Blockchain Foundry Inc as WebAssembly applications and expected for release not long after mainnet deployment of Syscoin Core 4.2. Both of these will be multi-coin wallets that support Syscoin, SPTs, Ethereum, and ERC-20 tokens. The Web3 wallet will provide functionality similar to Metamask.
Syscoin Platform and tokens are already integrated with Blockbook. Custom hardware wallet support currently exists via ElectrumSys. First-class HW wallet integration through apps such as Ledger Live will exist after 4.2.
Current supported wallets
Syscoin Spark Desktop
Syscoin-Qt

Explorers

Mainnet: https://sys1.bcfn.ca (Blockbook)
Testnet: https://explorer-testnet.blockchainfoundry.co

Thank you for close consideration of our proposal. We look forward to feedback, and to working with the Reddit community to implement an ideal solution using Syscoin Platform!

submitted by sidhujag to ethereum [link] [comments]

trying to setup solo mining bch - no website solo pools

Hello,
Old miner from 2013 back after almost 10 years...we used to solo mine through the qt apps back in the day Im not sure why the feature was removed. Coming back after i see crypto mining is not decentralized, i see chinese pools getting every bitcoin/crypto block. Regardless ive been trying to setup a bch solo mining for my local miners, I do not want a website like 2miners or ckpool, im not sure but do miners realize they are nothing like solo mining on a local qt wallet. After a few months of research ive come across yimp, mining core, and ive seen alot of block found by a client call "hath" or hathor acis boost" , ive seen hathor is a altcoin with merged mining are people using the hathor for mining other coins? Any help would be greatly appreciated, willing to send donations to whoever can help.
submitted by SuchCryptographer72 to btc [link] [comments]

A REVIEW ABOUT GX BLOCKS PLATFORM

Cryptocurrency has gained popularity and attracted attention of investors and enthusiasts because of it's technical features and usefulness as profitable investment tool. Nonetheless, cryptocurrency is not created freely rather large number of computer based miners are able to create Bitcoin and other altcoins through use of vast energy.
In the past years, researchers have revealed that 80% energy consumption is acquired through fossil fuels and it will continue to play a crucial role in the world's development. Regardless of the advantages obtained through fossil fuels, the harmful effects outweighs the benefits against the ecosystem and mankind survival. Moreover, energy used by miners during the process of confirming cryptocurrency transactions, recording and creating new Bitcoin or cryptocurrency units is obtained from coal and thermal plants which leads to increased Co2 emissions, air pollution, rise in global warming and death rates.
Sustainability of the environment is important for continuous mankind survival and growth. Thus, some innovative start-up are researching and introducing new alternative solutions to eliminate the reliance on fossil fuels or hydrocarbons plants for supply of energy used in Bitcoins and other cryptocurrency mining operations.
GX Blocks is an example of such latest innovations that intends to apply new strategies and techniques to minimize supply of Co2 emissions and harmful contaminants into the environment, through use of renewable energy units that is clean, safe and affordable for cryptocurrency miners. https://i.ibb.co/NnbZtNb/images-11.jpg
ABOUT GX BLOCKS
Gx Blocks platform runs on blockchain and comes with a Hybrid business model that is risk free as well merged with mobile mining units connected to renewable energy mechanisms.
The platform is incredibly intuitive and user friendly with a structured DLT ecosystem to help users experience profitable mining in cryptocurrency. In GX Blocks, affordable contracts are made available for users to purchase and receive passive income from GXB profit pools. This will be distributed to GXB smart contract holders on monthly basis.
Furthermore, these contracts enables users whether professional or newcomers to easily access innovative blockchain products and excavate desired cryptocurrency which comes without expensive or hidden management charges.
Also, Multi-signature wallet is made available to allow users store their assets, make transactions and purchase cryptocurrencies without complications. The developers integrated a dashboard for users to monitor live data on Megawatts productions and Hash Rate from mining facilities. An exchange interface is merged to the platform to enable users conveniently trade their crypto assets including inter-ledger payments protocol.
Users will experience the benefits of cold staking and masternode hosting. With this, anyone can stake their funds and earn incentives even offline. Leverage of liquid cooling methods enables GX Blocks system to lower total power requirements for mining operations up to 20%, thus users will experience smooth mining operations and make more profit via optimized DC energy efficiency.
At present, the platform operates efficiently through collaboration with three prestigious suppliers namely Bitmain, 3M Science and Beeminer. Partnership with these companies makes GX Blocks to be a sustainable solution that helps to limit relying on fossil fuels or electricity for crypto mining operations as well address challenges faced by several crypto mining platforms and customers.
MORE UPDATES
Currently, GX Blocks launched a bounty campaign for anyone to participate and get rewarded for their successful task. Use this link to get started : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5257397.0 ​ Some notable reviews about the platform are shown below:
- Domain is registered from 2018-09-11 https://who.is/whois/gxblocks.com
https://i.ibb.co/hch1gmW/EKQmL72.png
- Website Alexa rank : 2,485,469 https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/gxblocks.com
[https://i.ibb.co/bmKqkYg/HykcVnn.png
- Platform 's Confidence: 77%
https://www.scamadviser.com/check-website/gxblocks.com
https://i.ibb.co/QmLVNT6/vzb9VKI.png
GX BLOCKS ROADMAP
2019 - GXB Platform and Tech Specs - Complete Company Establishment - MIT Enterprise Forum Competition 2019 - Business Management Team Established - White Paper and Business Plan Created - GX Blocks Platform Development Start - Documents Submission to Governing Body - Strategic Alliance with Dezavou Associates.
2020 - IT team hired for platform development MVP (Beta - Released in 2 months). - Construction of Liquid Data Center 250 KW - Private Pre - Sale for GX Contracts Started - Public Pre - Sale in Q3 of 2020 - Renewable Energy Sources Selection/ Investments - Autonomous Mobile Mining Solution Testing
2021 - Alpha Version of GXB Dashboard Release - Test Liquid Cooling Methods in Mobile Mining Units - First Voting to Contracts Holders - Power costs cover up to 80% from RES - First full autonomous clean energy plant - Established advisory-partnerships with industry experts in the Legal, Finance & Blockchain Industries.
For more details, use the official links below :
Website: https://gxblocks.com
WhitePaper: https : //gxblocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/GX_Blocks_Platform_Q2_2020-1.pdf
GX Pre-Sale link : https://gxblocks.net/collections/gx-blocks-contracts
Telegram: https://t.me/gxblock
Twitter: https://twitter.com/GxBlocks
Facebook: https: // www.facebook.com/gxblocks/
Medium: https://medium.com/@gxblocks
Reddit: /useGxBlocks/
WRITER DETAILS, BTT Profile URL : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2326370;sa=summary

BTT Username : Johnson Knight
submitted by Cryptosaurus94 to ICOAnalysis [link] [comments]

✅ ChipMixer | Chip Mixer | Best Bitcoin Mixers | Bitcoin Mixer ✅

✅ ChipMixer | Chip Mixer | Best Bitcoin Mixers | Bitcoin Mixer ✅

https://preview.redd.it/6y2syselfnx31.jpg?width=140&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5f567f98be682a043ea1ab99e32223d5da82afad

Introducing ChipMixerMixing reinvented for your privacy


Clearnet link:
https://chipmixer.com/
What makes ChipMixer special?
ChipMixer creates Bitcoin addresses (chips) and funds them with specific sizes. There are chips with 0.001 BTC, 0.002 BTC, 0.004 BTC and so on till 4.096 BTC. When you deposit your Bitcoins, you receive same amount in chips. For example you deposit 0.112 BTC and you receive 0.064 + 0.032 + 0.016. Each chip was funded before your deposit, so there is no link between them and your deposit on blockchain. They are already anonymous. With each chip, you receive its private key, so you can spend them any time you want.
Why us?
We offer the best privacy you can get from Bitcoin mixer.

  • you have full control over mixing - it makes process random
  • outputs are fungible - every chip is exactly the same
  • outputs are faster than inputs - from blockchain perspective, you spend them before sending to mixer
  • output may be higher than input - optional betting inside
  • you can use multiple small inputs to merge into one big output off-chain
  • outputs can be used instantly - private key is yours and you set miner's fee
  • no fee, donation only - pay as much as you want
  • no accounts, no bitcodes to link your inputs
  • optional signed source of funds
  • we wait 48h for your input transaction and we can wait more on request
  • lightweight pages, no javascript required
How to use it with example
Step 1 - deposit
You receive input address. You deposit 0.1 BTC on received address and wait for one confirmation.
Step 2 - mixing
Your 0.1 BTC is exchanged for chips: 0.064 + 0.032 + 0.004.
You click on split button for 0.064 chip exchanging it for two 0.032 chips.
You click on split button for 0.004 chip exchanging it for two 0.002 chips. You click donate on smallest chip. Thank you!
Now you have 3 * 0.032 + 0.002. You click withdraw all.
Step 3 - withdraw
You see list of four private keys. Each marked with its size (3 * 0.032 BTC and 0.002 BTC) and public key. There is no on-chain connection between them and funds you deposited.
You import them into your wallet Electrum wallet and they are ready to be spent.
Total mixing time: 1 blockchain confirmation
Total cost: 0.002 BTC donate. You pay what you want.
Links
Clearnet link:
https://chipmixer.com/
submitted by blueman1025 to u/blueman1025 [link] [comments]

How To End The Cryptocurrency Exchange "Wild West" Without Crippling Innovation


In case you haven't noticed the consultation paper, staff notice, and report on Quadriga, regulators are now clamping down on Canadian cryptocurrency exchanges. The OSC and other regulatory bodies are still interested in industry feedback. They have not put forward any official regulation yet. Below are some ideas/insights and a proposed framework.



Many of you have limited time to read the full proposal, so here are the highlights:

Offline Multi-Signature

Effective standards to prevent both internal and external theft. Exchange operators are trained and certified, and have a legal responsibility to users.

Regular Transparent Audits

Provides visibility to Canadians that their funds are fully backed on the exchange, while protecting privacy and sensitive platform information.

Insurance Requirements

Establishment of basic insurance standards/strategy, to expand over time. Removing risk to exchange users of any hot wallet theft.


Background and Justifications


Cold Storage Custody/Management
After reviewing close to 100 cases, all thefts tend to break down into more or less the same set of problems:
• Funds stored online or in a smart contract,
• Access controlled by one person or one system,
• 51% attacks (rare),
• Funds sent to the wrong address (also rare), or
• Some combination of the above.
For the first two cases, practical solutions exist and are widely implemented on exchanges already. Offline multi-signature solutions are already industry standard. No cases studied found an external theft or exit scam involving an offline multi-signature wallet implementation. Security can be further improved through minimum numbers of signatories, background checks, providing autonomy and legal protections to each signatory, establishing best practices, and a training/certification program.
The last two transaction risks occur more rarely, and have never resulted in a loss affecting the actual users of the exchange. In all cases to date where operators made the mistake, they've been fully covered by the exchange platforms.
• 51% attacks generally only occur on blockchains with less security. The most prominent cases have been Bitcoin Gold and Ethereum Classic. The simple solution is to enforce deposit limits and block delays such that a 51% attack is not cost-effective.
• The risk of transactions to incorrect addresses can be eliminated by a simple test transaction policy on large transactions. By sending a small amount of funds prior to any large withdrawals/transfers as a standard practice, the accuracy of the wallet address can be validated.
The proposal covers all loss cases and goes beyond, while avoiding significant additional costs, risks, and limitations which may be associated with other frameworks like SOC II.

On The Subject of Third Party Custodians
Many Canadian platforms are currently experimenting with third party custody. From the standpoint of the exchange operator, they can liberate themselves from some responsibility of custody, passing that off to someone else. For regulators, it puts crypto in similar categorization to oil, gold, and other commodities, with some common standards. Platform users would likely feel greater confidence if the custodian was a brand they recognized. If the custodian was knowledgeable and had a decent team that employed multi-sig, they could keep assets safe from internal theft. With the right protections in place, this could be a great solution for many exchanges, particularly those that lack the relevant experience or human resources for their own custody systems.
However, this system is vulnerable to anyone able to impersonate the exchange operators. You may have a situation where different employees who don't know each other that well are interacting between different companies (both the custodian and all their customers which presumably isn't just one exchange). A case study of what can go wrong in this type of environment might be Bitpay, where the CEO was tricked out of 5000 bitcoins over 3 separate payments by a series of emails sent legitimately from a breached computer of another company CEO. It's also still vulnerable to the platform being compromised, as in the really large $70M Bitfinex hack, where the third party Bitgo held one key in a multi-sig wallet. The hacker simply authorized the withdrawal using the same credentials as Bitfinex (requesting Bitgo to sign multiple withdrawal transactions). This succeeded even with the use of multi-sig and two heavily security-focused companies, due to the lack of human oversight (basically, hot wallet). Of course, you can learn from these cases and improve the security, but so can hackers improve their deception and at the end of the day, both of these would have been stopped by the much simpler solution of a qualified team who knew each other and employed multi-sig with properly protected keys. It's pretty hard to beat a human being who knows the business and the typical customer behaviour (or even knows their customers personally) at spotting fraud, and the proposed multi-sig means any hacker has to get through the scrutiny of 3 (or more) separate people, all of whom would have proper training including historical case studies.
There are strong arguments both for and against using use of third party custodians. The proposal sets mandatory minimum custody standards would apply regardless if the cold wallet signatories are exchange operators, independent custodians, or a mix of both.

On The Subject Of Insurance
ShakePay has taken the first steps into this new realm (congratulations). There is no question that crypto users could be better protected by the right insurance policies, and it certainly feels better to transact with insured platforms. The steps required to obtain insurance generally place attention in valuable security areas, and in this case included a review from CipherTrace. One of the key solutions in traditional finance comes from insurance from entities such as the CDIC.
However, historically, there wasn't found any actual insurance payout to any cryptocurrency exchange, and there are notable cases where insurance has not paid. With Bitpay, for example, the insurance agent refused because the issue happened to the third party CEO's computer instead of anything to do with Bitpay itself. With the Youbit exchange in South Korea, their insurance claim was denied, and the exchange ultimately ended up instead going bankrupt with all user's funds lost. To quote Matt Johnson in the original Lloyd's article: “You can create an insurance policy that protects no one – you know there are so many caveats to the policy that it’s not super protective.”
ShakePay's insurance was only reported to cover their cold storage, and “physical theft of the media where the private keys are held”. Physical theft has never, in the history of cryptocurrency exchange cases reviewed, been reported as the cause of loss. From the limited information of the article, ShakePay made it clear their funds are in the hands of a single US custodian, and at least part of their security strategy is to "decline[] to confirm the custodian’s name on the record". While this prevents scrutiny of the custodian, it's pretty silly to speculate that a reasonably competent hacking group couldn't determine who the custodian is. A far more common infiltration strategy historically would be social engineering, which has succeeded repeatedly. A hacker could trick their way into ShakePay's systems and request a fraudulent withdrawal, impersonate ShakePay and request the custodian to move funds, or socially engineer their way into the custodian to initiate the withdrawal of multiple accounts (a payout much larger than ShakePay) exploiting the standard procedures (for example, fraudulently initiating or override the wallet addresses of a real transfer). In each case, nothing was physically stolen and the loss is therefore not covered by insurance.
In order for any insurance to be effective, clear policies have to be established about what needs to be covered. Anything short of that gives Canadians false confidence that they are protected when they aren't in any meaningful way. At this time, the third party insurance market does not appear to provide adequate options or coverage, and effort is necessary to standardize custody standards, which is a likely first step in ultimately setting up an insurance framework.
A better solution compared to third party insurance providers might be for Canadian exchange operators to create their own collective insurance fund, or a specific federal organization similar to the CDIC. Such an organization would have a greater interest or obligation in paying out actual cases, and that would be it's purpose rather than maximizing it's own profit. This would be similar to the SAFU which Binance has launched, except it would cover multiple exchanges. There is little question whether the SAFU would pay out given a breach of Binance, and a similar argument could be made for a insurance fund managed by a collective of exchange operators or a government organization. While a third party insurance provider has the strong market incentive to provide the absolute minimum coverage and no market incentive to payout, an entity managed by exchange operators would have incentive to protect the reputation of exchange operators/the industry, and the government should have the interest of protecting Canadians.

On The Subject of Fractional Reserve
There is a long history of fractional reserve failures, from the first banks in ancient times, through the great depression (where hundreds of fractional reserve banks failed), right through to the 2008 banking collapse referenced in the first bitcoin block. The fractional reserve system allows banks to multiply the money supply far beyond the actual cash (or other assets) in existence, backed only by a system of debt obligations of others. Safely supporting a fractional reserve system is a topic of far greater complexity than can be addressed by a simple policy, and when it comes to cryptocurrency, there is presently no entity reasonably able to bail anyone out in the event of failure. Therefore, this framework is addressed around entities that aim to maintain 100% backing of funds.
There may be some firms that desire but have failed to maintain 100% backing. In this case, there are multiple solutions, including outside investment, merging with other exchanges, or enforcing a gradual restoration plan. All of these solutions are typically far better than shutting down the exchange, and there are multiple cases where they've been used successfully in the past.

Proof of Reserves/Transparency/Accountability
Canadians need to have visibility into the backing on an ongoing basis.
The best solution for crypto-assets is a Proof of Reserve. Such ideas go back all the way to 2013, before even Mt. Gox. However, no Canadian exchange has yet implemented such a system, and only a few international exchanges (CoinFloor in the UK being an example) have. Many firms like Kraken, BitBuy, and now ShakePay use the Proof of Reserve term to refer to lesser proofs which do not actually cryptographically prove the full backing of all user assets on the blockchain. In order for a Proof of Reserve to be effective, it must actually be a complete proof, and it needs to be understood by the public that is expected to use it. Many firms have expressed reservations about the level of transparency required in a complete Proof of Reserve (for example Kraken here). While a complete Proof of Reserves should be encouraged, and there are some solutions in the works (ie TxQuick), this is unlikely to be suitable universally for all exchange operators and users.
Given the limitations, and that firms also manage fiat assets, a more traditional audit process makes more sense. Some Canadian exchanges (CoinSquare, CoinBerry) have already subjected themselves to annual audits. However, these results are not presently shared publicly, and there is no guarantee over the process including all user assets or the integrity and independence of the auditor. The auditor has been typically not known, and in some cases, the identity of the auditor is protected by a NDA. Only in one case (BitBuy) was an actual report generated and publicly shared. There has been no attempt made to validate that user accounts provided during these audits have been complete or accurate. A fraudulent fractional exchange, or one which had suffered a breach they were unwilling to publicly accept (see CoinBene), could easily maintain a second set of books for auditors or simply exclude key accounts to pass an individual audit.
The proposed solution would see a reporting standard which includes at a minimum - percentage of backing for each asset relative to account balances and the nature of how those assets are stored, with ownership proven by the auditor. The auditor would also publicly provide a "hash list", which they independently generate from the accounts provided by the exchange. Every exchange user can then check their information against this public "hash list". A hash is a one-way form of encryption, which fully protects the private information, yet allows anyone who knows that information already to validate that it was included. Less experienced users can take advantage of public tools to calculate the hash from their information (provided by the exchange), and thus have certainty that the auditor received their full balance information. Easy instructions can be provided.
Auditors should be impartial, their identities and process public, and they should be rotated so that the same auditor is never used twice in a row. Balancing the cost of auditing against the needs for regular updates, a 6 month cycle likely makes the most sense.

Hot Wallet Management
The best solution for hot wallets is not to use them. CoinBerry reportedly uses multi-sig on all withdrawals, and Bitmex is an international example known for their structure devoid of hot wallets.
However, many platforms and customers desire fast withdrawal processes, and human validation has a cost of time and delay in this process.
A model of self-insurance or separate funds for hot wallets may be used in these cases. Under this model, a platform still has 100% of their client balance in cold storage and holds additional funds in hot wallets for quick withdrawal. Thus, the risk of those hot wallets is 100% on exchange operators and not affecting the exchange users. Since most platforms typically only have 1%-5% in hot wallets at any given time, it shouldn't be unreasonable to build/maintain these additional reserves over time using exchange fees or additional investment. Larger withdrawals would still be handled at regular intervals from the cold storage.
Hot wallet risks have historically posed a large risk and there is no established standard to guarantee secure hot wallets. When the government of South Korea dispatched security inspections to multiple exchanges, the results were still that 3 of them got hacked after the inspections. If standards develop such that an organization in the market is willing to insure the hot wallets, this could provide an acceptable alternative. Another option may be for multiple exchange operators to pool funds aside for a hot wallet insurance fund. Comprehensive coverage standards must be established and maintained for all hot wallet balances to make sure Canadians are adequately protected.

Current Draft Proposal

(1) Proper multi-signature cold wallet storage.
(a) Each private key is the personal and legal responsibility of one person - the “signatory”. Signatories have special rights and responsibilities to protect user assets. Signatories are trained and certified through a course covering (1) past hacking and fraud cases, (2) proper and secure key generation, and (3) proper safekeeping of private keys. All private keys must be generated and stored 100% offline by the signatory. If even one private keys is ever breached or suspected to be breached, the wallet must be regenerated and all funds relocated to a new wallet.
(b) All signatories must be separate background-checked individuals free of past criminal conviction. Canadians should have a right to know who holds their funds. All signing of transactions must take place with all signatories on Canadian soil or on the soil of a country with a solid legal system which agrees to uphold and support these rules (from an established white-list of countries which expands over time).
(c) 3-5 independent signatures are required for any withdrawal. There must be 1-3 spare signatories, and a maximum of 7 total signatories. The following are all valid combinations: 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7.
(d) A security audit should be conducted to validate the cold wallet is set up correctly and provide any additional pertinent information. The primary purpose is to ensure that all signatories are acting independently and using best practices for private key storage. A report summarizing all steps taken and who did the audit will be made public. Canadians must be able to validate the right measures are in place to protect their funds.
(e) There is a simple approval process if signatories wish to visit any country outside Canada, with a potential whitelist of exempt countries. At most 2 signatories can be outside of aligned jurisdiction at any given time. All exchanges would be required to keep a compliant cold wallet for Canadian funds and have a Canadian office if they wish to serve Canadian customers.
(2) Regular and transparent solvency audits.
(a) An audit must be conducted at founding, after 3 months of operation, and at least once every 6 months to compare customer balances against all stored cryptocurrency and fiat balances. The auditor must be known, independent, and never the same twice in a row.
(b) An audit report will be published featuring the steps conducted in a readable format. This should be made available to all Canadians on the exchange website and on a government website. The report must include what percentage of each customer asset is backed on the exchange, and how those funds are stored.
(c) The auditor will independently produce a hash of each customer's identifying information and balance as they perform the audit. This will be made publicly available on the exchange and government website, along with simplified instructions that each customer can use to verify that their balance was included in the audit process.
(d) The audit needs to include a proof of ownership for any cryptocurrency wallets included. A satoshi test (spending a small amount) or partially signed transaction both qualify.
(e) Any platform without 100% reserves should be assessed on a regular basis by a government or industry watchdog. This entity should work to prevent any further drop, support any private investor to come in, or facilitate a merger so that 100% backing can be obtained as soon as possible.
(3) Protections for hot wallets and transactions.
(a) A standardized list of approved coins and procedures will be established to constitute valid cold storage wallets. Where a multi-sig process is not natively available, efforts will be undertaken to establish a suitable and stable smart contract standard. This list will be expanded and improved over time. Coins and procedures not on the list are considered hot wallets.
(b) Hot wallets can be backed by additional funds in cold storage or an acceptable third-party insurance provider with a comprehensive coverage policy.
(c) Exchanges are required to cover the full balance of all user funds as denominated in the same currency, or double the balance as denominated in bitcoin or CAD using an established trading rate. If the balance is ever insufficient due to market movements, the firm must rectify this within 24 hours by moving assets to cold storage or increasing insurance coverage.
(d) Any large transactions (above a set threshold) from cold storage to any new wallet addresses (not previously transacted with) must be tested with a smaller transaction first. Deposits of cryptocurrency must be limited to prevent economic 51% attacks. Any issues are to be covered by the exchange.
(e) Exchange platforms must provide suitable authentication for users, including making available approved forms of two-factor authentication. SMS-based authentication is not to be supported. Withdrawals must be blocked for 48 hours in the event of any account password change. Disputes on the negligence of exchanges should be governed by case law.

Steps Forward

Continued review of existing OSC feedback is still underway. More feedback and opinions on the framework and ideas as presented here are extremely valuable. The above is a draft and not finalized.
The process of further developing and bringing a suitable framework to protect Canadians will require the support of exchange operators, legal experts, and many others in the community. The costs of not doing such are tremendous. A large and convoluted framework, one based on flawed ideas or implementation, or one which fails to properly safeguard Canadians is not just extremely expensive and risky for all Canadians, severely limiting to the credibility and reputation of the industry, but an existential risk to many exchanges.
The responsibility falls to all of us to provide our insight and make our opinions heard on this critical matter. Please take the time to give your thoughts.
submitted by azoundria2 to QuadrigaInitiative [link] [comments]

$10 BTC Need someone to add a Logo to my token on Uniswap.

Aloha, im a jr dev, and i have reached the point of giving up, but this is important to me and my brand. I need to upload my Logo (same as my profile pic ) to my metooken on uniswap: https://uniswap.info/pai0xd69b44037338bb76afe226be5035481c09f9ab52
Ive been chatting with the main devs on the discord. So uniswap uses a third party Trust wallet to load the token images.
I have followed this guide: https://github.com/trustwallet/assets
I have tried both methods they suggested. I got to the point where they are asking me to make a payment to merge the pull request.
I have no idea if this is a scam or not, I am only trying to have my image logo show up on uniswap. This is getting way to stressfull and confusing and at this point i would rather pay someone to do it for me.
pm me if your serious about fixing this for bitcoin
submitted by Crypto_Rootz to Jobs4Bitcoins [link] [comments]

✅ ChipMixer | Chip Mixer | Best Bitcoin Mixers | Bitcoin Mixer ✅

✅ ChipMixer | Chip Mixer | Best Bitcoin Mixers | Bitcoin Mixer ✅

https://preview.redd.it/gc2n532lfnx31.jpg?width=140&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ab7b7e3e9c7003e41f2562824374625c4192f758

Introducing ChipMixerMixing reinvented for your privacy


Clearnet link:
https://chipmixer.com/
What makes ChipMixer special?
ChipMixer creates Bitcoin addresses (chips) and funds them with specific sizes. There are chips with 0.001 BTC, 0.002 BTC, 0.004 BTC and so on till 4.096 BTC. When you deposit your Bitcoins, you receive same amount in chips. For example you deposit 0.112 BTC and you receive 0.064 + 0.032 + 0.016. Each chip was funded before your deposit, so there is no link between them and your deposit on blockchain. They are already anonymous. With each chip, you receive its private key, so you can spend them any time you want.
Why us?
We offer the best privacy you can get from Bitcoin mixer.

  • you have full control over mixing - it makes process random
  • outputs are fungible - every chip is exactly the same
  • outputs are faster than inputs - from blockchain perspective, you spend them before sending to mixer
  • output may be higher than input - optional betting inside
  • you can use multiple small inputs to merge into one big output off-chain
  • outputs can be used instantly - private key is yours and you set miner's fee
  • no fee, donation only - pay as much as you want
  • no accounts, no bitcodes to link your inputs
  • optional signed source of funds
  • we wait 48h for your input transaction and we can wait more on request
  • lightweight pages, no javascript required
How to use it with example
Step 1 - deposit
You receive input address. You deposit 0.1 BTC on received address and wait for one confirmation.
Step 2 - mixing
Your 0.1 BTC is exchanged for chips: 0.064 + 0.032 + 0.004.
You click on split button for 0.064 chip exchanging it for two 0.032 chips.
You click on split button for 0.004 chip exchanging it for two 0.002 chips. You click donate on smallest chip. Thank you!
Now you have 3 * 0.032 + 0.002. You click withdraw all.
Step 3 - withdraw
You see list of four private keys. Each marked with its size (3 * 0.032 BTC and 0.002 BTC) and public key. There is no on-chain connection between them and funds you deposited.
You import them into your wallet Electrum wallet and they are ready to be spent.
Total mixing time: 1 blockchain confirmation
Total cost: 0.002 BTC donate. You pay what you want.
Links
Clearnet link:
https://chipmixer.com/
submitted by blueman1025 to u/blueman1025 [link] [comments]

Attempt at an unbiased summary of the IOTA attack by a non-bag holder

On February 12th the IOTA Foundation (IF) posted a status update:
February 12th 2020 - 08:55
After receiving several reports of fund theft that looked out of the ordinary in a short timeframe we decided to warn about this in Discord and on Twitter. As a precaution we ask you to keep your Trinity wallet closed for now.
25 minutes later they decide to shut down the "coordinator", blocking all "value" transactions.
February 12th 2020 - 09:20
After initial investigation we decided to turn off the Coordinator to make sure no further theft can occur until we find out the root cause of these thefts. Further investigation taking place from here on.
They then spend 5 days investigating the theft.
After about 24 hours, only about 10 people reported that they had been stolen from/were identified.
February 13th 2020 - 07:45
We've shifted the complete focus of all relevant resources of the IOTA Foundation to this investigation last night and we have been working in teams to investigate impact and cause together with the identified victims. The conclusions so far are:
- Most evidence is pointing towards seed theft, cause still unknown and under investigation
- Victims (around 10 that identified with the IOTA Foundation so far) all seem to have recently used Trinity
However, it seems by examining at the transactions that they knew were associated with the theft and were able to identify some new thefts.
February 14th 2020 - 05:45
...
The investigation has yielded absolutely no indication that there has been a core protocol breach of any kind. Rather, all evidence so far points to a problem with a dependency of the Trinity wallet.
The attack pattern analysis showed that the halt of the coordinator interrupted the attacker's attempts to liquidate funds on exchanges. The stolen funds have been purposely and repeatedly merged and split to obfuscate the investigation, and with the current token exchange rate as well as exchanges' KYC limits in mind. We received additional feedback from more exchanges (not all yet), confirming that none of the identified transactions has been received or liquidated. Our current assumption is that the perpetrator targeted high value accounts first, before moving on to smaller accounts and then being interrupted early by the halt of the coordinator. (Again: Hardware wallet users are not affected.)
To me, the details sound like the perpetrator was experienced and knew how to convert the tokens to a less-centralized cryptocurency without KYC/AML. It wasn't simply a crime of opportunity, but rather there was some planning.
There was a lot of speculation over whether or not the hacker was "sophisticated". Of course, he did manage to pwn IOTA's official wallet. However, the "Chairman of the Board" of IOTA wrote "Let's just say theres a lot of traces. The attacker does not seem to have been tоо sophisticated", on discord. Screenshot
On February 16th, IF released a new version of their wallet.

Trinity Desktop 1.4.1 is out.
...
- Update: Remove exchange support (#2565)
- Update: Adjust update alerts and disable auto update (#2566)
- Fix: Allow wallet entry when nodes are not in sync (#2563)
- Update: New Crowdin translations (#2553) - Fix: Endless loading cycle (#2568)
Two interesting changes are they removed exchange support and they disabled auto updates. IF had recently integrated "Moonpay"in their wallet, which allows users to buy IOTA with their credit cards for a 4.5% fee. Moonpay appears to be affiliated with Roger Ver and Bitcoin.com but I didn't look into this too much. Purely speculation, but it seems that Moonpay may be involved in the key theft.
Quite a few users in Discord were reporting that they had trouble with the new version.
About 12 hours later they released a new desktop version (1.4.2) with
- Fix: Incorrect alert on password change for some users (#2570)
Fast forward to today, IF released their remediation plan.
Basically, if you used their official wallet since December 17th, 2019 then your seed might be compromised. However, they say that the attack didn't really start until January 25th, so the Dec 17th date is out of an abundance of caution. (Note: I'm pretty sure December 17th is when Moonpay integration occurred.)
Here's the IF remediation plan from status.iota.org:
February 17th 2020 - 05:47
Here is a short overview of the attack remediation plan and the next steps going forward. Essentially the remediation plan involves three steps:
STEP 1: INSTALL UPDATED VERSION OF TRINITY
As announced yesterday, we have released an updated version of Trinity which allows you to check your balance and transactions. Please download this newest version of Trinity here and install it over your old version: https://github.com/iotaledgetrinity-wallet/releases/tag/desktop-1.4.1
When you download the new version, MAKE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORD AND STORE IT IN A PASSWORD MANAGER. If you have used the same password also for other services or websites, we strongly recommend you change it there, too, as a precaution.
By upgrading to this new version of Trinity, you will remove the vulnerability from your wallet and render the hacker incapable of accessing your wallet if s/he has not already done so.
STEP 2: MIGRATE YOUR TOKENS TO SAFE SEEDS
In the upcoming days, we will release a seed migration tool that will allow users to transfer their tokens to a safe seed. We strongly recommend that ALL users who have opened any version of Trinity (Desktop or Mobile) since the 17th of December 2019 utilize the tool and migrate their tokens to a new, safe seed during the soon-to-be-announced migration period BEFORE the coordinator is re-started. More information on the tool and how to use it will be provided when the tool is published.
By migrating your tokens to new, safe seeds prior to the re-start of the coordinator, you will render the attacker incapable of making unauthorized transfers of your tokens if s/he has not already done so.
*Note: our current information indicates that the hack started on or around 25 January 2020 and that only Trinity Desktop users’ seeds were potentially compromised. However, out of an abundance of caution, we are nevertheless recommending that ALL users (not only desktop users) who are concerned about possible token loss should migrate their tokens to a new seed.
*Note: Ledger Nano users do not need to use the migration tool but a password change is still strongly recommended.
STEP 3: RECLAIM YOUR STOLEN TOKENS IF NECESSARY
Our current information indicates that only a limited number of bundles were successfully transferred by the attacker out of the true owners’ wallets. We have notified all exchanges of all compromised bundles we are aware of so as to prevent any further movement of any stolen tokens. We therefore anticipate that in the majority of cases, Steps 1 and 2 will be sufficient to protect most users’ tokens.
To address the minority of cases in which unauthorized token transfers were made out of users’ wallets, a third step is needed. We will perform a global snapshot of the network that will, pending community validation, enable us to bring stolen tokens back to the affected users. More information on the process as well as the consequences for all affected users will be provided soon.
Assuming the snapshot is successfully validated by the IOTA community (node operators), we will implement a KYC procedure involving a third party that will enable all users who had their tokens stolen to reclaim them. The same procedure will also be required for certain cases in which the migration tool is used fraudulently or incorrectly. More information on this process will follow shortly.
After the migration process, we will restart the coordinator and resume normal operations on the network. An update on the timeline will be released in the upcoming days.
We will publish detailed instructions on the steps users should take as soon as the remediation tools and processes are ready. For now, please make sure to download the new Trinity version to change your password and check your balance.
We would also like to ask any affected users from the United States to come forward and DM our team, as your cooperation could assist us with ongoing law enforcement investigations.
Thank you all for your patience. We will continue to update you on all important steps along the way and will do our best to make the transition as easy and smooth as possible.
So yea, if you got your tokens stolen, they will return them to you after you submit KYC/AML to the IOTA Foundation, assuming that "node operators" agree to roll back the theft.
Hopefully users didn't reuse the same seed for another cryptocurrency because they won't be able to roll those back.
It sounds like they're working with the FBI (or US law enforcement) on this which is a bit surprising. I'm skeptical that they have really identified the perpetrator -- a common attack is to steal developer Github credentials which could be what happened here. But again, that's purely speculation.
Please don't repost this on your for-profit crypto news site without attributing to me ;)

edit: formatting
submitted by Priest_of_Satoshi to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Ledger Live  Bitcoin BTC Event & Ledger Wallet Updates ... How to Merge Two Videos Together with the Command Line Custodial Lightning Wallets, with Brian Trollz ~ Open ... How to earn FREE Soul Tokens (Merge Cat) ELA Merge Mining - Deep Dive

Here is why you cannot merge wallets. Different from what the term "wallet" denotes, there is no such a thing as a wallet in a PC or in any other device. A "wallet" is basically a combination of private key and public key. The coins are not in the wallet. It would be better to describe the situation saying that there are some coins assigned to your public key in the public bitcoin ledger. The ... “The next way is to use multiple wallets but split your total bitcoin holdings between them. To do this, it requires backing up more than one wallet seed, but each is isolated from the other if one develops a problem. Tracking your total bitcoin holdings is harder this way. Some people even use spreadsheets or other financial software to follow it all, especially if they have paper wallets ... Contribute to Bitcoin-com/Wallet development by creating an account on GitHub. I know about pywallet, about this modification for bitcoind, but what is a simple way to merge two wallets, or export a list of private keys and addresses of all of wallets from litecoin, dogecoin, bitcoin, quark, et cetera? Thank you! wallet.dat. share improve this question follow edited Sep 7 '14 at 16:44. Nick ODell. 27.2k 8 8 gold badges 54 54 silver badges 115 115 bronze badges ... r/Bitcoin: A community dedicated to Bitcoin, the currency of the Internet. Bitcoin is a distributed, worldwide, decentralized digital money … Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. r/Bitcoin. log in sign up. User account menu. 4. Have TWO Wallets in Electrum - Any Way of COMBINING Wallets to Save Fees. Close. 4. Posted by 2 years ago ...

[index] [21511] [48480] [15599] [24811] [2438] [49766] [46775] [46383] [35081] [33146]

Ledger Live Bitcoin BTC Event & Ledger Wallet Updates ...

p2pool node setup with merged mining Kiefff RC. Loading... Unsubscribe from Kiefff RC? ... How to Download & Verify the Bitcoin Core Wallet - Duration: 15:29. Rex Kneisley 18,318 views. 15:29 ... Address: 1LEDGERZAr585chHw5LmRL6KJKKQtwYth1 More information on the site: ledgerdrop.сс At Ledger we are developping hardware wallet technology that provid... POS Coins Wallet Tutorial on VPS ... Coins and minting POSWwallet - earn dividends - Duration: 2:19. Bitcoin News 1,371 views. 2:19. Rich Dad Poor Dad Summary (Animated) - Duration: 8:52 ... Close. This video is unavailable. Now onto the next part actually merging the files together. MP4Box -cat 1.mp4 -cat 2.mp4 -new 3.mp4 In the example above the flag the flag -cat is used along with -new. The cat flag denotes that ...

#