• Breaking News

    Sunday, October 13, 2019

    Home Unlabelled BTC "We propose a B2B electronic gold system. For everything else there's Mastercard" -Satoshi whitepaper (Blockstream Edition)

    BTC "We propose a B2B electronic gold system. For everything else there's Mastercard" -Satoshi whitepaper (Blockstream Edition)

    October 13, 2019

    BTC "We propose a B2B electronic gold system. For everything else there's Mastercard" -Satoshi whitepaper (Blockstream Edition)

    "We propose a B2B electronic gold system. For everything else there's Mastercard" -Satoshi whitepaper (Blockstream Edition)

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 06:08 PM PDT

    Peter R. Rizun:"Given Lightning's design and BTC's fees, it's inevitable that regular users will use custodial wallets. Bitcoin was designed for regular users to easily use non-custodial SPV wallets, which unfortunately are no longer fashionable..."

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 01:41 PM PDT

    US Senators Issue Threatening Letters to Stripe, Mastercard, Visa Over Facebook Coin Libra

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 08:02 PM PDT

    Why Bitcoin Cash is Terrifying to Bitcoin Maximalists

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 09:00 AM PDT

    Bitcoin Cast Program Gives Guests a Unique SLP Token

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 09:08 PM PDT

    Debunking latest Core rhetoric: Medium of Exchange ≠ Means of Payment

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 06:03 PM PDT

    Lately I've seen the "medium of exchange is not the same thing as a method of payment" idea being floated a lot by BTC maxis. Saifdean Ammous tried to pull this out in his debate with a George Selgin. The Bitcoin Observer also mentioned this argument on Twitter in a discussion about Libra's failure. However, according to this paper, the distinction between a medium of exchange and a means of payment is that a means of payment is not necessarily settled immediately. They argue that currency is a medium of exchange, while checks and debit cards are not.

    In my opinion, this exposes the fundamental flaw in the argument that "Bitcoin is not a method of payment". It's as if the Coretards are trying to separate Bitcoin UTXOs from the Bitcoin P2P network and Bitcoin mining, and arguing that the network isn't important, and mining is a given. However, without the payment, mining, and P2P validation network, BTC UTXOs have a clear value: ZERO. You can't separate them, the value depends 100% on the network and mining. And as we saw in 2017, when fees rose over $100/transactions, a fair percentage of UTXOs became unspendable, as the fees to move them would be higher than their value.

    Of course, we live in a world increasingly dominated by electronic fiat, is this a medium of exchange? Electronic fiat has a fairly tenuous supply and value, and it also depends intrinsically on a payment network that is controlled by governments and corporations. Increasingly, electronic fiat appears to be more a method of spurring labor and creating debt.

    Thoughts are welcomed.

    submitted by /u/horsebadlyredrawn
    [link] [comments]

    The Irony: Adam Back Talking to Tone "The-Freeloader" Vays about free loader risk

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 05:31 PM PDT

    Thanks to all who have been and are shuffling on this #ShuffleSaturday !

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 12:56 PM PDT

    In case you haven't got in on the cash-shuffling action yet, read up about it here:

    https://cashshuffle.com

    All you need is an Electron Cash wallet, transfer a bit of money into it, and you'll be shuffling in no time on the Bitcoin Cash chain.

    Doing so will help boost transactional privacy and thwart snooping chain analysts!

    https://www.electroncash.org

    If you miss this Shuffle Saturday, there is still Sunday! ;-)

    (You can actually shuffle everyday, it's just that more people shuffling at the same time helps everyone get their coins shuffled faster - that's why we establish a little tradition of weekend shuffling)

    submitted by /u/LovelyDay
    [link] [comments]

    btc.com is a joke?

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 09:47 PM PDT

    So, their API is down for more than 7 days ( https://btc.com/api-doc ). There is absolutely no information about issue. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/ddlllu/api_of_btccom_is_down_more_than_12h/

    Are they planning to do something?

    submitted by /u/lorfdan
    [link] [comments]

    Announcing www.bestbchwallets.com an overview&review site for Bitcoin Cash Mobile & Desktop wallets!

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 03:11 PM PDT

    Visualizing MySpace's Downfall - Most Popular Social Networks 2003 - 2019

    Posted: 13 Oct 2019 01:06 AM PDT

    "based on several undisclosed vulnerabilities, I would recommend all Casa node users remove their assets from the device until further notice. The clear text seed word transmission is a red flag, but there are multiple other red flags as well."

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 01:38 PM PDT

    Bitcoin Cash in action

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 10:47 AM PDT

    "Me to bitcoin price commentators" xpost from r/Bitcoin. Are the majority of core supporters rubes? Honestly, what's the deal?

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 02:55 PM PDT

    Dividends using Bitcoin Cash tokens?

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 03:40 PM PDT

    Is this already possible/feasible? And how? And what are best practices?

    submitted by /u/MichaelTen
    [link] [comments]

    Slovenia Has the Most BCH-Accepting Physical Locations Worldwide

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 03:20 AM PDT

    Some proportions: Bitcoin Price is Up 838,000,000% in Ten Years’ Time

    Posted: 13 Oct 2019 01:40 AM PDT

    6 Monitoring Websites That Help Track Bitcoin Cash Data

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 03:12 PM PDT

    Naomi Brockwell privacy guide -- Coinjoin tutorial, featuring cashshuffle

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 06:18 AM PDT

    Accept BCH: 4 Noncustodial Bitcoin Cash-Powered Payment Button Generators

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 04:33 AM PDT

    Ukraine in a Rush to Legalize Cryptocurrencies Under Zelensky - Bitcoin News

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 06:51 AM PDT

    A Profit-Seeking Prophecy

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 12:25 PM PDT

    PROPOSAL: Lite Client Compatible Onchain Unique Name System

    Posted: 12 Oct 2019 05:43 AM PDT

    What I am proposing is a system that allows a user to be able to register his name on-chain in such a way that it is trivial for someone running solely an SPV wallet to verify the authenticity of their claim to ownership of their name. The protocol can also be easily expanded to allow transfer of ownership of the name, although that will not be covered in detail here but it very much easily achievable and importantly it does not require any extra or specialised server in order to operate.

    This could have many uses within the Bitcoin Cash ecosystem as it provides a way for users to be able to remember and identify each other by their names and not their addresses or stealth addresses which substantially improves usability and allows for Bitcoin Cash to be an even better electronic cash and widely used means of payment.

    The problem with most designs for an onchain protocol for name registration is the difficulty for those who do not have the capacity to scan through the full blockchain (i.e those using an SPV wallet) to verify a claim to ownership of a name.

    This is because, assuming that name ownership is awarded by the rules of the protocol on a first-in-first-serve basis, one must be sure that any given claim in a transaction on the blockchain to ownership of a name is in fact the first claim to ownership of that name. This can only be ensured, usually, by going and looking at all other transactions that have the potential to include registration information and ensuring that none previously include a claim to this name.

    The reason this poses a difficulty for a lite client is because by definition they do not know the entire history of the blockchain and so as a result are not able to easily be sure of the authenticity of any claim to a name. This has resulted in the inevitable situation that we currently find the state of onchain name registration systems to be in which is having to trade off between the presence of a server to scan the blockchain to verify the authenticity of a name or the non-uniqueness of names, as we see in cashaccounts, for instance.

    The solution being proposed solves this problem of lite client verification of a name ownership proof by forcing, through the protocol's rules, that all claims to ownership of a particular name are made using an output direct to a specific "burner" address that is deterministically generated from the name itself, for instance it could be the name plus an agreed upon padding until the end of the address (besides the checksum).

    So what this means is that any claim to ownership of a name is a transaction that has a p2pkh output that sends to an address that is generated from the name being registered, so such an address for the name "bob" might look like: 1bobfffffffffffffffffffffffffffff[checksum]

    Said output would also contain an op_return that includes whatever string, address or stealth address the user wants to associate with this name.

    What is achieved by forcing the output's p2pkh target address to be this deterministically calculated address is that now all that is required in order to verify the authenticity of a claim to it is to simply ask a full node or spv server to return all transactions sent to that address and to ensure that the first transaction sent to it (that contains an op_return in the same output, as defined above) is the one given to them as the claim to ownership. It seems Reddit is limiting the size of this post so read the rest here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cHv-bBxnijexohF7x-i_RICIncbzpFrxBeoXMSVtuCk/edit?usp=drivesdk

    Let me know what you think/if you have any questions :)

    submitted by /u/soundmoneyio
    [link] [comments]
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment