|
klafbang posted:
Wait you are joking right? That has to be a joke but it’s bitcoin so I really don’t know...
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 20:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 20:05 |
|
|
klafbang posted:When butters refer to brain wallets, it is typically 12 word phrases based on standard dictionaries with 2048 words. I'm sure there are also applications that allow you to do it with a custom pass phase because that would be the dumbest idea, but using the method properly would result in 132 bits of entropy, which is likely enough. ECDSA 128 bits is reasonably secure now but not for archival; I'm not enough of a cryptography nerd to decide whether ECDSA 256 with a 132 bit seed is weaker or stronger than that. related: https://www.wired.com/story/i-forgot-my-pin-an-epic-tale-of-losing-dollar30000-in-bitcoin/ MarcusSA posted:Wait you are joking right? Nope, the system operates on consensus and the action of mining new blocks is what determines consensus. So if you have thousands of coins but don't operate mining hardware 24/7 you're at the mercy of those who do. (In practice these giant changes don't happen because it also undermines the idea of it being immutable digital money if it is shown to be totally mutable. Miners don't want bitcoins to lose value, if people saw that coins could be taken away or moved from dead wallets they'd sell.) Klyith fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
Bitcoin miners could agree to anything and rip the rug right out from everyone in an instant if they ever got their poo poo together. One agreed to software change and suddenly all the bitcoins are ours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 20:51
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:Wait you are joking right? tl;dr: Nope. The bitcoin protocol can and has changed in the past. Originally, it supported general smart contracts but turned out this was a bad idea, so the protocol was limited to only allow a set of supported transactions. Later, it was changed to move some data out of transactions to conserve blockchain space (and allow more transactions per block), but this extension, called segwit, was rejected by miners. Later again, the set of allowed transactions was extended to support the lightning network (coming real soon now). All of those changes changed which types of transaction were allowed. Other changes are to the block size (to get around the transaction limits); it is currently stuck at 2 MB, not for any protocol reason, but because miners have dedicated hardware that doesn't work with larger block sizes, so they voted down block size extensions. Except some fo them didn't, and that came bitcoin cash with a larger block size. The allowed transactions have been changed all the time, and there's no reason it couldn't be again. Bitcoins do not really exist as a balance, but as unspent transactions. A transaction is not an encrypted file saying "2 butts," but a cryptographic challenge. Challenges are parts of programs, and you have to provide the other part. Typically, a challenge is "provide a signature and a public key so that the signature can be validated using the public key and the public key has this hash value I know." That is an extremely cumbersome formulation for actually good reasons (makes bitcoin less vulnerable e to quantum computer attacks). Satisfying the challenge is trivial if you have the private key, but hard otherwise. The signature is not of the old transaction (containing the butts), but of the new transaction (spending the butts), so you cannot just take an answered challenge and put in your own bitcoin address (which is really just the hash of the public key). There is no reason the operation of "check signature" couldn't be changed. For example, it could be changed to "check signature if I refer to a transaction within the last 262800 blocks, otherwise always return true. In fact, I mentioned segwit above. That required a change to exactly this operation. The only reason they didn't change things in the past was because it would not be beneficial for miners (making their expensive electricity->heat devices obsolete). A change granting miners more free butts would be very much to their benefit. In the past such changes have lead to forks, like all the bcashes. Most of them die out, but some, like the two biggest bitcoin cashes still exist. Value that goes into a fork goes away from the main bitcoin (at least according to economical theory), so if a bitcoin with garbage collection is big enough it will hurt the butters that remain with bitcoin without. And if enough miners switch, mining speed of regular bitcoin would be severely hurt for a while (also happened in the past). Bitcoins "produced" in mining are also just a special type of transaction, and only limited by a rule that says it has to halve every 210000 blocks. That leads to the number of butts produced by mining following a geometric series, which converges to 21 million. Change that rule to say that after block 615000 these block reward transactions grant 1000 butts every time, badabing--badaboom, no limit on bitcoins anymore. So, in short, it is definitely technically possible and each of the components needed to do it have happened in the past. Butters claim miners would never do this as it would tank bitcoin, but they have been wrong before. klafbang fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
klafbang posted:tl;dr: Nope.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
Fleetwood Crack posted:That's a whole lotta words spent describing something that will never happen. As a poster above pointed out, it's not in anyone's interest to make bitcoin mutable. It will fail and die eventually, but certainly not for this reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 22:09
|
|
|
Nessus posted:It's not in anyone's interest right now. That's a different story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 22:19
|
|
|
I just think we can - and have a responsibility to - make better arguments against bitcoin than the btc equivalent of "sooner or later the central bankers will hyper inflate the dollar  ".
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
EorayMel posted:lol if you don't craft your passwords from shitposts from a random 2005 gassed something awful thread about video games
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 22:34
|
|
|
Fleetwood Crack posted:What I mean is, if some (even a majority) of miners were to try and do this, it would represent a hard fork. The mutable chain would die a quick death post-fork, and that mining power would soon end up being redirected to the surviving, immutable chain. My change does not make bitcoin mutable. It just changes the rules, as has already happened in the past. And bcash shows there's no reason such a fork would die out quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 22:34
|
|
|
klafbang posted:My change does not make bitcoin mutable. It just changes the rules, as has already happened in the past. And bcash shows there's no reason such a fork would die out quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
Fleetwood Crack posted:I just think we can - and have a responsibility to - make better arguments against bitcoin than the btc equivalent of "sooner or later the central bankers will hyper inflate the dollar  No, we don't. I will remind anyone still reading this thread that bitcoiners are really some of the dumbest & greediest idiots one can find. Yes the handful of them running the show who least have half a brain would never do this. That leaves the rest that are in fact that loving stupid. Never treat these people with anything that resembles respect. They have shown over the course of a decade that they don't deserve it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 23:02
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:Wait you are joking right? The blockchain being consensus based means that any actor or set of actors with 51% of the hashing has admin power. Do-anything-you-want admin power. The ability to perform administrative actions on BTC with raw hash power has been used, too. quote:“To coordinate a reorg to revert unknown’s transactions. This is a 51% attack. The absolutely worst attack possible. It’s there in the whitepaper. What about (miner and developer) decentralized and uncensorable cash? Only when convenient?” This makes bitcoin something akin to triply hilarious because at least the Fed and other IRL central banks do not have the power to do this, making crypto far more controllable by a central authority than any other currency in existence. Complications fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 23:22
|
|
|
Fleetwood Crack posted:Lol bcash Yeah lol. There’s two of them and they are on their own the 4th and 5th biggest cryptos. Combined, they would be the 3rd largest. Despite one of them, last I heard, was controlled almost entirely by a single exchange. The entire thing is a shitshow ruled by market manipulation. I’m not suggesting miners will tank bitcoin to their own detriment, but saying they can, and have demonstrated in the past willingness to, alter the operation of bitcoin to their own benefit rather than the benefit of bitcoin users (lol). Bitcoin was designed to align the goals of miners and users, preferably by having them be the same group. It didn’t turn out that way, and now the goals of miners and bitcoin users are no longer aligned. All that is for the “deflation is good” libertarians to lose is formatie child pornographers, drug dealers and money launderers to band to getter and accept that, e.g., keeping the mining reward at 12.5 butts per block instead of reducing it is the price to pay for keeping the network running.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 23:29
|
|
|
klafbang posted:Yeah lol. There’s two of them and they are on their own the 4th and 5th biggest cryptos. Combined, they would be the 3rd largest. Despite one of them, last I heard, was controlled almost entirely by a single exchange.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 23:50
|
|
|
Lol imagine a bank being all like “hey you haven’t used the money in your savings account in 5 years it’s ours now sorry lololol”
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 23:58
|
|
|
The Australian government actually does this They collect any savings account that hasnt had a transaction in 24 months into a govt holding account that bears no interest for you. They'll pay it back if you ask nicely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 00:42
|
|
|
norp posted:The Australian government actually does this Wtf? Why? Like.... what the hell?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 00:44
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:Wtf? Why? Like.... what the hell? Because it's all a charade. The world's currencies are already virtual. Do we know how much is really out there? Possession is 9/10ths of the law.. wouldn't that just be the equivalent of a 0% T-bill? Also, +1 not your keys not your coins
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 00:50
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:Wtf? Why? Like.... what the hell? It's a not a standard typical saving's account, but a retirement investment account similar to a 401k style thing. It's compulsory employers to pay 9.5% of your gross wages into it and quite a few of the big employers mandate that they only pay super into a specific super fund so if you job hop every 2-3 years you end up with a bunch of different super accounts with small amounts in them unless you're actively consolidating them, which people forget about easily because it's just something that their employer(s) handle for them in the background. Meanwhile if there's no money being put into it then it's sitting there gaining some small amount of interest, but at the same time being charger greater amounts in fees etc so if it stayed in there indefinately the people managing it would just suck it dry through fees. https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Super/In-detail/Growing-your-super/Inactive-low-balance-super-accounts/
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 02:40
|
|
|
Rudager posted:It's a not a standard typical saving's account, but a retirement investment account similar to a 401k style thing. OK this makes much more sense thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
norp posted:The Australian government actually does this Sounds like unclaimed/escheated property.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 03:31
|
|
|
klafbang posted:That's actually two times wrong. Oh, lol. I made the classic mistake of assuming anything bitcoin couldn’t get arbitrarily worse at any moment. (Thanks for correcting me!) Akratic Method fucked around with this message at 04:34 on Jan 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 04:30
|
|
|
Rudager posted:It's a not a standard typical saving's account, but a retirement investment account similar to a 401k style thing. That's not what I'm talking about https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/tools-and-resources/find-unclaimed-money Although it says they give you interest and it's 5 years
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 04:49
|
|
|
norp posted:The Australian government actually does this Do you have any source for this? I really doubt that's precisely how it works. Edit: I should refresh before replying. But yeah, that says 7 years which is very different.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 06:13
|
|
|
quote:Since 2015, the time after which money becomes 'unclaimed' in bank accounts is seven years; previously, it was three years. The three year thing was what I was remembering, It was a big deal during the Rudd government when they changed it from seven down to 3 because while the money in that account can be claimed back it sits as a cash asset on the government books until then They used it as a cynical play to improve the budget position by a few hundred million bucks after the GFC. I didn't realise it had been put back to seven since then
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 06:56
|
|
|
a hot gujju bhabhi posted:Do you have any source for this? I really doubt that's precisely how it works. The USA does something similar. I had an old checking account account with my hometown small bank that I forgot about until they sent me a letter saying "hey, uh, are you dead? If not, you should do a transaction soon or your account will be forfeited to the government.". No idea if it would have been a temporary account I could get back or just complete forfeiture since I didn't let it happen, but yeah they definitely don't let unclaimed unused accounts just sit forever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 08:49
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:Lol imagine a bank being all like “hey you haven’t used the money in your savings account in 5 years it’s ours now sorry lololol” I lost about 300,000 airline miles this year because I hadn’t had a transaction in 18 months and their notification emails got marked as spam. They’ve been ruled by courts to have financial value (such as in divorce settlements and dissolution of businesses), so it’s not that different.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 12:05
|
|
|
Texas did that. Every year there would be a supplemental in the newspaper with a list of accounts about to be forfeited. "If your account is on this list, contact your bank immediately". The limit was several years of inactivity. They didn't give amounts, just names, bank and what type of account. Once the state got their mitts on it, though it was theirs. Kind of understandable, since if the old cat lady down the street has three accounts and no relatives, what happens to the cash when she died and gets eaten? Personally I'd rather it go into state coffers than some corporate assholes pocket.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
In NY at least, it gets marked as "abandoned" then handed to the NYS Comptroller for safekeeping. If you can prove you are such a person, they even have a website where you can see if the state is holding your money!
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
^^^^^^^ Yeah, that. Same/very similar for Pennsylvania.Akratic Method posted:The USA does something similar. I had an old checking account account with my hometown small bank that I forgot about until they sent me a letter saying "hey, uh, are you dead? If not, you should do a transaction soon or your account will be forfeited to the government.". No idea if it would have been a temporary account I could get back or just complete forfeiture since I didn't let it happen, but yeah they definitely don't let unclaimed unused accounts just sit forever. It's not forfeited in all (any?) states, it's sent to the state's unclaimed property office. They don't just take it from you - you can fill out the right forms and get it back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 17:10
|
|
|
I can't imagine not being my own bank. It just seems to absurd that someone else controls your money, and they look at every transaction you've ever done and share it with govt and insurance companies. Such a scam, I really hate older generations for perpetuating this tyranny. Even Bitcoin is retarded, everyone can see your balance and all your transactions. This is why privacy coins like Monero will soon reign supreme.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 22:19
|
|
|
ghosTTy posted:soon Lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
I wonder how hard the cope will be when Monero reaches a trillion market cap. It already seems like Bitcoin getting to where it is has driven plenty of you mad. Will you still be lucid enough to understand? Will they allow you to post here in a retirement home? You likely won't have money for a computer after the financial collapse. I feel bad, a lot of you have been saving your whole life, but you've also been ignorant of the truth so... STIFF
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
ghosTTy posted:I wonder how hard the cope will be when Monero reaches a trillion market cap. It already seems like Bitcoin getting to where it is has driven plenty of you mad. Will you still be lucid enough to understand? Will they allow you to post here in a retirement home? You likely won't have money for a computer after the financial collapse.  ghosTTy posted:if bitcoin doesnt get to 1mil by the end of the 2018 permaban me permaban everyone. start over. who cares, not me. bitcoin will be 1mil
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 22:43
|
|
|
Cope
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 22:48
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 22:49
|
|
|
ghosttitty how old is your cryptowaifu, really
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 22:55
|
|
|
Personally, when I construct fantasy visions of my own total vindication and the humiliation of my enemies, I do it the old fashioned way - with religion! Posters these days need their drat internet money to construct a comforting narrative.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 20:05 |
|
|
Ghost titty IRL: Except, it’s not computer games, it’s drugs, money laundering and worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 23:13
|
|