kanzure

24 ms·

211.
by kanzure 9y ago
sharding has the same problem: if you want to check whether a coin has been double spent, then you need to go look at all the relevant shards anyway. http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/scalingbitcoin/sharding-t
212.
by kanzure 9y ago
I also use many 100s of browser tabs almost all the time. The Opera browser in 2009-2011 used to handle 500 tabs easily for me. These days I am often sitting at >200 tabs in both Chrome and Firefox on same machine. I'd like to see a
213.
by kanzure 9y ago
> or who has secret knowledge about [SNARKs vulnerabilities and/or] formal verification holes or whatever http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/snarks/A%20Note%20on...
214.
by kanzure 9y ago
Yes, so you end up having to select a person that is mutually agreeable between the parties or something, and that person is then responsible for judging the evidence. In my experience the problem has been that finding a mutually agreeable
215.
by kanzure 9y ago
previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14807779
216.
by kanzure 9y ago
> [Prediction markets] only work for the part of truth that can be eventually verified and objectively confirmed/disproved but it's a start. Requires an arbiter/judge, otherwise you'll just end up with one of the two
217.
by kanzure 9y ago
"DO NOT USE BEACON GENERATED VALUES AS SECRET CRYPTOGRAPHIC KEYS" but people will do it anyway, the level of insanity out there is really high https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/68pusp/gavin_
218.
by kanzure 9y ago
duuuupes, feed me dupes https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14758587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14788663 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14809259 https://news.yco
219.
by kanzure 9y ago
> wouldn't the work factor decrease so that regular people could run it on their desktop machines? other people would start mining-- botnets, gpu gaming enthusiasts, people with excess FPGA capacity, etc. and then these people would
220.
by kanzure 9y ago
and then https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14788663
221.
by kanzure 9y ago
popularity does not correspond to vetting (see the recent parity multisig vulnerability), and highly reviewed software is not necessarily popular (how many people know about libsecp256k1?).
222.
by kanzure 9y ago
well, you should consider doing actual cryptographic signatures over the document, plus timestamping like via https://opentimestamps.org/
223.
by kanzure 9y ago
follow-up thread was posted over here, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14788663
224.
by kanzure 9y ago
> and it's not bitcoin; it doesn't have the same assurances, there are some third-party channels that route the transactions. (I admit, I haven't studied LN in detail.) lightning clients pass around bitcoin transactions to
225.
by kanzure 9y ago
> In the same way, segwit2x != Chinere miners, but come on, there is an clear overlap there's more overlap with core developers and chaincode labs. > Lightning network might be a vaporware. Literally nobody is using it, since it
226.
by kanzure 9y ago
you're talking only about SPV proof of transaction inclusion, not about the other fraud proofs necessary for the version of SPV theorized in bitcoin.pdf here's a recent one: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips&#x2
227.
by kanzure 9y ago
> End users can still validate transactions via SPV, which is completely valid and provable without storing the entire block chain fraud proofs don't work because if you want to prevent someone from creating a fraud proof, you never
228.
by kanzure 9y ago
Yeah I don't think the core developers have ever claimed to have control. Isn't this one of the main reasons why they have refused to implement auto-upgrade in Bitcoin Core?
229.
by kanzure 9y ago
> Is it just that SegWitX2 is considered too rushed? https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6h612o/can_someone... and https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6hkuze
230.
by kanzure 9y ago
> To be specific, fully 88%(!) of miners are actively signaling support for the upgrade plan known as "segwit2x".[1] Unfortunately, signaling is more like a bumper sticker you slap on your blocks. The rules you deploy and activ
231.
by kanzure 9y ago
Not really a "civil war"-- basically, bitcoin will keep working, even without the segwit upgrade if it gets delayed another year or two, and there might be some new altcoins that could be spun off from the current bitcoin, and the
232.
by kanzure 9y ago
> none of the proposed scaling methods so far come even close you sure? what happened to the estimates related to payment channel proposals: http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/scalingbitcoin/hong-kong/o
233.
by kanzure 9y ago
Here are some bitcoiners and bitcoin developers talking about why privacy and fungibility is important. This might help to explain why so many of the bitcoin developers have been interested in coinjoin and confidential transactions: http:&
234.
by kanzure 9y ago
Not joking at all. Thank you for the link. I recently proposed error correction codes for an entirely separate purpose: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/enzymaticsynthesis/WvDidIldm... I would like to also add
235.
by kanzure 9y ago
> We need a new 'Manhattan project' to find and enforce a solution. No, we don't. Large-scale geoengineering proposals have already been made and they are like <$1B each. Many have been calculated to reduce global avera
236.
by kanzure 9y ago
You could stripe the memory across multiple different people who are responsible for smaller fragments. Each person can be responsible for some number of shared fragments. See your issued handbook, subsection "Surviving information sto
237.
by kanzure 9y ago
I am not completely sure, but I think I doxxed her by accident on public IRC on 2013-07-06 ( http://gnusha.org/logs/2013-07-05.log ; someone else edited the public logs ("strangeland") to try to minimize my d
238.
by kanzure 9y ago
> and the geometric kernel has a ton of little issues that you have to work around Under the hood, OpenCASCADE is an eyesore. Here are my notes from a deep dive where I was attempting a sane reimplementation: http://diyhpl.us&
239.
by kanzure 9y ago
A similar device was proposed a while back-- a nanopore DNA sequencing array implanted into the heart that checks all circulating DNA. In context, the authors had proposed embedding some enzymes in every neuron to record action potentials,
240.
by kanzure 10y ago
How often do fusion proteins fail to work? I see a lot of "just stick this catalytic domain to dCas9" and I am not really sure why that works.

More ›