Moving the Bitcoin Core Data Directory - Bitzuma

IRC Log from Ravencoin Open Developer Meeting - Aug 24, 2018

[14:05] <@wolfsokta> Hello Everybody, sorry we're a bit late getting started
[14:05] == block_338778 [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:06] <@wolfsokta> Here are the topics we would like to cover today • 2.0.4 Need to upgrade - What we have done to communicate to the community • Unique Assets • iOS Wallet • General Q&A
[14:06] == Chatturga changed the topic of #ravencoin-dev to: 2.0.4 Need to upgrade - What we have done to communicate to the community • Unique Assets • iOS Wallet • General Q&A
[14:06] <@wolfsokta> Daben, could you mention what we have done to communicate the need for the 2.0.4 upgrade?
[14:07] == hwhwhsushwban [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:07] <@wolfsokta> Others here are free to chime in where they saw the message first.
[14:07] == hwhwhsushwban [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Client Quit]
[14:08] Whats up bois
[14:08] hi everyone
[14:08] hi hi
[14:08] <@wolfsokta> Discussing the 2.0.4 update and the need to upgrade.
[14:08] <@Chatturga> Sure. As most of you are aware, the community has been expressing concerns with the difficulty oscillations, and were asking that something be done to the difficulty retargeting. Many people submitted suggestions, and the devs decided to implement DGW.
[14:09] <@Tron> I wrote up a short description of why we're moving to a new difficulty adjustment.
[14:09] <@Chatturga> I have made posts on discord, telegram, bitcointalk, reddit, and from testnet stages through current.
[14:10] <@Chatturga> If there are any other channels that can reach a large number of community members, I would love to have more.
[14:10] <@wolfsokta> Thanks Tron, that hasn't been shared to the community at large yet, but folks feel free to share it.
[14:10] When was this decision made and by whom and how?
[14:10] <@Chatturga> I have also communicated with the pool operators and exchanges about the update. Of all of the current pools, only 2 have not yet updated versions.
[14:11] <@wolfsokta> The decision was made by the developers through ongoing requests for weeks made by the community.
[14:12] <@wolfsokta> Evidence was provided by the community of the damages that could be caused to projects when the wild swings continue.
[14:12] So was there a meeting or vote? How can people get invited
[14:12] <@Tron> It was also informed by my conversations with some miners that recommended that we make the change before the coin died. They witnessed similar oscillations from which other coins never recovered.
[14:13] only two pools left to upgrade is good, what about the exchanges? Any word on how many of those have/have not upgraded?
[14:13] <@wolfsokta> We talked about here in our last meeting Bruce_. All attendees were asked if they had any questions or concerns.
[14:13] == blondfrogs [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:13] == roshii [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:13] sup roshii long time no see
[14:14] <@Chatturga> Bittrex, Cryptopia, and IDCM have all either updated or have announced their intent to update.
[14:14] == wjcgiwgu283ik3cj [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:15] sup russki
[14:15] what's the status here?
[14:15] I don’t think that was at all clear from the last dev meeting
[14:15] I can’t be the only person who didn’t understand it
[14:15] <@wolfsokta> Are there any suggestions on how to communicate the need to upgrade even further? I am concerned that others might also not understand.
[14:17] I’m not sold on the benefit and don’t understand the need for a hard fork — I think it’s a bad precedent to simply go rally exchanges to support a hard fork with little to no discussion
[14:17] so just to note, the exchanges not listed as being upgraded or have announced their intention to upgrade include: qbtc, upbit, and cryptobridge (all with over $40k usd volume past 24 hours according to coinmarketcap)
[14:18] <@wolfsokta> I don't agree that there was little or no discussion at all.
[14:19] <@wolfsokta> Looking back at our meeting notes from two weeks ago "fork" was specifically asked about by BrianMCT.
[14:19] If individual devs have the power to simple decide to do something as drastic as a hard fork and can get exchanges and miners to do it that’s got a lot of issues with centralization
[14:19] <@wolfsokta> It had been implemented on testnet by then and discussed in the community for several weeks before that.
[14:19] == under [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:19] howdy
[14:19] Everything I’ve seen has been related to the asset layer
[14:19] I have to agree with Bruce_, though I wasn't able to join the last meeting here. That said I support the fork
[14:20] Which devs made this decision to do a fork and how was it communicated?
[14:20] well mostly the community made the decision
[14:20] Consensus on a change is the heart of bitcoin development and I believe the devs have done a great job building that consensus
[14:20] a lot of miners were in uproar about the situation
[14:20] <@wolfsokta> All of the devs were supporting the changes. It wasn't done in isolation at all.
[14:21] This topic has been a huge discussion point within the RVN mining community for quite some time
[14:21] the community and miners have been having issues with the way diff is adjusted for quite some time now
[14:21] Sure I’m well aware of that -
[14:21] Not sold on the benefits of having difficulty crippled by rented hashpower?
[14:21] The community saw a problem. The devs got together and talked about a solution and implemented a solution
[14:21] I’m active in the community
[14:22] So well aware of the discussions on DGW etc
[14:22] Hard fork as a solution to a problem community had with rented hashpower (nicehash!!) sounds like the perfect decentralized scenario!
[14:23] hard forks are very dangerous
[14:23] mining parties in difficulty drops are too
[14:23] <@wolfsokta> Agreed, we want to keep them to an absolute minimum.
[14:23] But miners motivation it’s the main vote
[14:24] What would it take to convince you that constantly going from 4 Th/s to 500 Gh/s every week is worse for the long term health of the coin than the risk of a hard fork to fix it?
[14:24] == Tron [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
[14:24] This hardfork does include the asset layer right? if so why is it being delayed in implementation?
[14:24] <@wolfsokta> Come back Tron!
[14:24] coudl it have been implement through bip9 voting?
[14:24] also hard fork is activated by the community! that's a vote thing!
[14:24] @mrsushi to give people time to upgrade their wallet
[14:25] @under, it would be much hard to keep consensus with a bip9 change
[14:25] <@wolfsokta> We investigated that closely Under.
[14:25] == Tron [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:25] <@wolfsokta> See Tron's post for more details about that.
[14:25] <@spyder_> Hi Tron
[14:25] <@wolfsokta>
[14:25] Sorry about that. Computer went to sleep.
[14:26] I'm wrong
[14:26] 2 cents. the release deadline of october 31st puts a bit of strain on getting code shipped. (duh). but fixing daa was important to the current health of the coin, and was widely suppported by current mining majority commuity. could it have been implemented in a different manner? yes . if we didnt have deadlines
[14:27] == wjcgiwgu283ik3cj [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[14:27] sushi this fork does not include assets. it's not being delayed though, we're making great progress for an Oct 31 target
[14:28] I don’t see the urgency but my vote doesn’t matter since my hash power is still CPUs
[14:28] <@wolfsokta> We're seeing the community get behind the change as well based on the amount of people jumping back in to mine through this last high difficulty phase.
[14:28] So that will be another hardfork?
[14:28] the fork does include the asset code though set to activate on oct 30th
[14:28] yes
[14:29] <@wolfsokta> Yes, it will based on the upgrade voting through the BIP9 process.
[14:29] I wanted to ask about burn rates from this group: and make a proposal.
[14:29] we're also trying hard to make it the last for awhile
[14:29] Can you clear up the above — there will be this one and another hard fork?
[14:29] <@wolfsokta> Okay, we could discuss that under towards the end of the meeting.
[14:30] If this one has the asset layer is there something different set for October
[14:30] <@wolfsokta> Yes, there will be another hard fork on October 31st once the voting process is successful.
[14:31] <@wolfsokta> The code is in 2.0.4 now and assets are active on testnet
[14:31] Bruce, the assets layer is still being worked on. Assets is active on mainnet. So in Oct 31 voting will start. and if it passes, the chain will fork.
[14:31] this one does NOT include assets for mainnet Bruce -- assets are targeted for Oct 31
[14:31] not***
[14:31] not active****
[14:31] correct me if I'm wrong here, but if everyone upgrades to 2.0.4 for this fork this week, the vote will automatically pass on oct 31st correct? nothing else needs to be done
[14:31] Will if need another download or does this software download cover both forks?
[14:31] <@wolfsokta> Correct Urgo
[14:32] thats how the testnet got activated and this one shows "asset activation status: waiting until 10/30/2018 20:00 (ET)"
[14:32] Will require another upgrade before Oct 31
[14:32] thank you for the clarification wolfsokta
[14:32] <@wolfsokta> It covers both forks, but we might have additional bug fixes in later releases.
[14:32] So users DL one version now and another one around October 30 which activates after that basically?
[14:33] I understand that, but I just wanted to make it clear that if people upgrade to this version for this fork and then don't do anything, they are also voting for the fork on oct 31st
[14:33] Oh okay — one DL?
[14:33] Bruce, Yes.
[14:33] Ty
[14:33] well there is the issue that there maybe some further consensus bugs dealing with the pruneability of asset transactions that needs to be corrected between 2.0.4 and mainnet. so i would imagine that there will be further revisions required to upgrade before now and october 31
[14:33] @under that is correct.
[14:34] I would highly recommend bumping the semver up to 3.0.0 for the final pre 31st release so that the public know to definitely upgrade
[14:34] @under +1
[14:35] out of curiosity, have there been many bugs found with the assets from the version released in july for testnet (2.0.3) until this version? or is it solely a change to DGW?
[14:35] <@wolfsokta> That's not a bad idea under.
[14:35] <@spyder_> @under good idea
[14:35] @urgo. Bugs are being found and fixed daily.
[14:35] Any time the protocol needs to change, there would need to be a hard fork (aka upgrade). It is our hope that we can activate feature forks through the BIP process (as we are doing for assets). Mining pools and exchanges will need to be on the newest software at the point of asset activation - should the mining hash power vote for assets.
[14:35] blondfrogs: gotcha
[14:35] There have been bugs found (and fixed). Testing continues. We appreciate all the bug reports you can give us.
[14:36] <@wolfsokta> Yes! Thank you all for your help in the community.
[14:37] (pull requests with fixes and test coverage would be even better!)
[14:37] asset creation collision is another major issue. current unfair advantage or nodes that fore connect to mining pools will have network topologies that guarantee acceptance. I had discussed the possibility of fee based asset creation selection and i feel that would be a more equal playing ground for all users
[14:38] *of nodes that force
[14:38] <@wolfsokta> What cfox said, we will always welcome development help.
[14:38] So just to make sure everyone know. When assets is ready to go live on oct 31st. Everyone that wants to be on the assets chain without any problems will have to download the new binary.
[14:39] <@wolfsokta> The latest binary.
[14:39] under: already in the works
[14:39] excellent to hear
[14:39] == UserJonPizza [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:39] <@wolfsokta> Okay, we've spent a bunch of time on that topic and I think it was needed. Does anybody have any other suggestions on how to get the word out even more?
[14:40] maybe preface all 2.0.X releases as pre-releases... minimize the number of releases between now and 3.0 etc
[14:41] <@wolfsokta> Bruce_ let's discuss further offline.
[14:41] wolfsokta: which are the remaining two pools that need to be upgraded? I've identified qbtc, upbit, and cryptobridge as high volume exchanges that haven't said they were going to do it yet
[14:41] so people can help reach out to them
[14:41] f2pool is notoriously hard to contact
[14:41] are they on board?
[14:42] <@wolfsokta> We could use help reaching out to QBTC and Graviex
[14:42] I can try to contact CB if you want?
[14:42] <@Chatturga> The remaining pools are Ravenminer and PickAxePro.
[14:42] <@Chatturga> I have spoken with their operators, the update just hasnt been applied yet.
[14:42] ravenminer is one of the largest ones too. If they don't upgrade that will be a problem
[14:42] okay good news
[14:42] (PickAxePro sounds like a Ruby book)
[14:43] I strongly feel like getting the word out on would be beneficial
[14:44] that site is sorely in need of active contribution
[14:44] Anyone can volunteer to contribute
[14:44] <@wolfsokta> Okay, cfox can you talk about the status of unique assets?
[14:44] sure
[14:45] <@wolfsokta> I'll add website to the end of our topics.
[14:45] code is in review and will be on the development branch shortly
[14:45] would it make sense to have a page on the wiki (or somewhere else) that lists the wallet versions run by pools & exchanges?
[14:45] will be in next release
[14:45] furthermore, many sites have friendly link to the standard installers for each platform, if the site linked to the primary installers for each platform to reduce github newb confusion that would be good as well
[14:46] likely to a testnetv5 although that isn't settled
[14:46] <@wolfsokta> Thanks cfox.
[14:46] <@wolfsokta> Are there any questions about unique assets, and how they work?
[14:47] after the # are there any charachters you cant use?
[14:47] will unique assets be constrained by the asset alphanumeric set?
[14:47] ^
[14:47] <@Chatturga> @Urgo there is a page that tracks and shows if they have updated, but it currently doesnt show the actual version that they are on.
[14:47] a-z A-Z 0-9
[14:47] <@Chatturga>
[14:47] There are a few. Mostly ones that mess with command-line
[14:47] you'll be able to use rpc to do "issueunique MATRIX ['Neo','Tank','Tank Brother']" and it will create three assets for you (MATRIX#Neo, etc.)
[14:47] @cfox - No space
[14:48] @under the unique tags have an expanded set of characters allowed
[14:48] Chatturga: thank you
[14:48] @UJP yes there are some you can't use -- I'll try to post gimmie a sec..
[14:49] Ok. Thank you much!
[14:49] 36^36 assets possible and 62^62 uniques available per asset?
[14:49] <@spyder_> std::regex UNIQUE_TAG_CHARACTERS("^[[email protected]$%&*()[\\]{}<>_.;?\\\\:]+$");
[14:50] regex UNIQUE_TAG_CHARACTERS("^[[email protected]$%&*()[\\]{}<>_.;?\\\\:]+$")
[14:50] oh thanks Mark
[14:51] <@wolfsokta> Okay, next up. I want to thank everybody for helping test the iOS wallet release.
[14:51] <@wolfsokta> We are working with Apple to get the final approval to post it to the App Store
[14:51] @under max asset length is 30, including unique tag
[14:51] Does the RVN wallet have any other cryptos or just RVN?
[14:52] == BruceFenton [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:52] will the android and ios source be migrated to the ravenproject github?
[14:52] I've been adding beta test users. I've added about 80 new users in the last few days.
[14:52] <@wolfsokta> Just RVN, and we want to focus on adding the asset support to the wallet.
[14:53] == Bruce_ [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
[14:53] <@wolfsokta> Yes, the code will also be freely available on GitHub for both iOS and Android. Thank you Roshii!
[14:53] Would you consider the iOS wallet to be a more secure place for one's holdings than say, a Mac connected to the internet?
[14:53] will there be a chance of a more user freindly wallet with better graphics like the iOS on PC?
[14:53] the android wallet is getting updated for DGW, correct?
[14:53] <@wolfsokta> That has come up in our discussion Pizza.
[14:54] QT framework is pretty well baked in and is cross platform. if we get some qt gurus possibly
[14:54] Phones are pretty good because the wallet we forked uses the TPM from modern phones.
[14:54] Most important is to write down and safely store your 12 word seed.
[14:54] TPM?
[14:54] <@wolfsokta> A user friendly wallet is one of our main goals.
[14:55] TPM == Trusted Platform Module
[14:55] Ahhh thanks
[14:55] just please no electron apps. they are full of security holes
[14:55] <@spyder_> It is whats makes your stuffs secure
[14:55] not fit for crypto
[14:55] under: depends on who makes it
[14:55] The interface screenshots I've seen look like Bread/Loaf wallet ... I assume that's what was forked from
[14:55] ;)
[14:56] <@wolfsokta> @roshii did you see the question about the Android wallet and DGW?
[14:56] Yes, it was a fork of breadwallet. We like their security.
[14:56] chromium 58 is the last bundled electron engine and has every vuln documented online by google. so unless you patch every vuln.... methinks not
[14:56] Agreed, great choice
[14:57] <@wolfsokta> @Under, what was your proposal?
[14:58] All asset creation Transactions have a mandatory OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY of 1 year(or some agreed upon time interval), and the 500 RVN goes to a multisig devfund, run by a custodial group. We get: 1) an artificial temporary burn, 2) sustainable community and core development funding for the long term, after OSTK/Medici 3) and the reintroduction of RVN supply at a fixed schedule, enabling the removal of the 42k max cap of total As
[14:58] *im wrong on the 42k figure
[14:58] <@wolfsokta> Interesting...
[14:59] <@wolfsokta> Love to hear others thoughts.
[14:59] Update: I posted a message on the CryptoBridge discord and one of their support members @stepollo#6276 said he believes the coin team is already aware of the fork but he would forward the message about the fork over to them right now anyway
[14:59] Ifs 42 million assets
[14:59] yep.
[15:00] I have a different Idea. If the 500 RVN goes to a dev fund its more centralized. The 500 RVN should go back into the unmined coins so miners can stay for longer.
[15:01] *without a hardfork
[15:01] <@wolfsokta> lol
[15:01] that breaks halving schedule, since utxos cant return to an unmined state.
[15:01] @UJP back into coinbase is interesting. would have to think about how that effects distribution schedule, etc.
[15:01] only way to do that would be to dynamicaly grow max supply
[15:02] and i am concerned already about the max safe integer on various platforms at 21 billion
[15:02] js chokes on ravencoin already
[15:02] <@wolfsokta> Other thoughts on Under's proposal? JS isn't a real language. ;)
[15:02] Well Bitcoin has more than 21 bn Sats
[15:02] Is there somebody who wants to volunteer to fix js.
[15:02] hahaha
[15:03] I honestly would hate for the coins to go to a dev fund. It doesn't seem like Ravencoin to me.
[15:03] Yep, but we're 21 billion x 100,000,000 -- Fits fine in a 64-bit integer, but problematic for some languages.
[15:03] <@wolfsokta> Thanks UJP
[15:04] <@wolfsokta> We're past time but I would like to continue if you folks are up for it.
[15:04] Yeah no coins can go anywhere centrality contorted like a dev fund cause that would mean someone has to run it and the code can’t decide that so it’s destined to break
[15:05] currently and long term with out the financial backing of development then improvements and features will be difficult. we are certainly thankful for our current development model. but if a skunkworks project hits a particular baseline of profitability any reasonable company would terminate it
[15:05] Yes let’s contibue for sure
[15:05] the alternative to a dev fund in my mind would be timelocking those funds back to the issuers change address
[15:06] But we can’t have dev built in to the code — it has to be open source like Bitcoin and monero and Litecoin - it’s got drawbacks but way more advantages- it’s the best model
[15:06] Dev funding
[15:06] i highly reccommend not reducing the utility of raven by removing permanently the supply
[15:07] == BW_ [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[15:07] timelocking those funds accompllishes the same sacrifice
[15:07] @under timelocking is interesting too
[15:07] How exactly does timelocking work?
[15:07] <@wolfsokta> ^
[15:07] I mean you could change the price of assets with the Block reward halfing.
[15:07] == Roshiix [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[15:08] funds cant be spent from an address until a certain time passes
[15:08] but in a what magical fairy land do people continue to work for free forever. funding development is a real issue... as much as some might philosphically disagree. its a reality
[15:08] You’d still need a centralized party to decide how to distribute the funds
[15:08] even unofficially blockstream supports bitcoin devs
[15:08] on chain is more transparent imho
[15:09] == Tron_ [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[15:09] @UJP yes there are unlimited strategies. one factor that I think is v important is giving application developers a way to easily budget for projects which leads to flat fees
[15:09] If the project is a success like many of believe it will be, I believe plenty of people will gladly done to a dev fund. I don't think the 500 should be burned.
[15:09] *donate
[15:09] centralized conservatorship, directed by community voting process
[15:10] == Tron [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
[15:10] <@wolfsokta> Thanks Under, that's an interesting idea that we should continue to discuss in the community. You also mentioned the existing website.
[15:10] It would need to be something where everyone with a QT has a vote
[15:10] think his computer went to sleep again :-/
[15:10] I agree UJP
[15:10] with the website
[15:10] No that’s ico jargon — any development fund tied to code would have to be centralized and would therefor fail
[15:11] ^
[15:11] ^
[15:11] ^
[15:11] dashes model for funding seems to be pretty decentralized
[15:11] community voting etc
[15:11] Once you have a dev fund tied to code then who gets to run it? Who mediates disputes?
[15:11] oh well another discussion
[15:11] Dash has a CEO
[15:12] <@wolfsokta> Yeah, let's keep discussing in the community spaces.
[15:12] Dash does have a good model. It's in my top ten.
[15:12] having the burn go to a dev fund is absolute garbage
[15:12] These dev chats should be more target than broad general discussions — changing the entire nature of the coin and it’s economics is best discussed in the RIPs or other means
[15:13] <@wolfsokta> Yup, let's move on.
[15:13] just becuase existing implementation are garbage doesnt mean that all possible future governance options are garbage
[15:13] <@wolfsokta> To discussing the website scenario mentioned by under.
[15:13] the website needs work. would be best if it could be migrated to github as well.
[15:13] What about this: Anyone can issue a vote once the voting feature has been added, for a cost. The vote would be what the coins could be used for.
[15:14] features for the site that need work are more user friendly links to binaries
[15:14] <@wolfsokta> We investigated how bitcoin has their website in Github to make it easy for contributors to jump in.
[15:14] that means active maintenance of the site instead of its current static nature
[15:15] <@wolfsokta> I really like how it's static html, which makes it super simple to host/make changes.
[15:15] the static nature isn’t due to interface it’s due to no contributors
[15:15] no contribution mechanism has been offered
[15:15] github hosted would allow that
[15:16] We used to run the Bitcoin website from the foundation & the GitHub integration seemed to cause some issues
[15:16] its doesnt necessarily have to be hosted by github but the page source should be on github and contributions could easily be managed and tracked
[15:17] for example when a new release is dropped, the ability for the downlaods section to have platform specific easy links to the general installers is far better for general adoption than pointing users to github releases
[15:18] <@wolfsokta> How do people currently contribute to the existing website?
[15:18] they dont?
[15:18] We did that and it was a complete pain to host and keep working — if someone wants to volunteer to do that work hey can surely make the website better and continually updated — but they could do that in Wordpress also
[15:19] I’d say keep an eye out for volunteers and maybe we can get a group together who can improve the site
[15:19] == digitalvap0r-xmr [[email protected]/web/cgi-irc/] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[15:19] And they can decide best method
[15:20] I host the source for the explorer on github and anyone can spin it up instantly on a basic aws node. changes can be made to interface etc, and allow for multilingual translations which have been offered by some community members
[15:20] there are models that work. just saying it should be looked at
[15:20] i gotta run thank you all for your contributions
[15:20] <@wolfsokta> I feel we should explore the source for the website being hosted in GitHub and discuss in our next dev meeting.
[15:21] <@Chatturga> Thanks Under!
[15:21] == under [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[15:21] <@wolfsokta> Thanks, we also need to drop soon.
[15:21] There is no official site so why care. Someone will do better than the next if RVN is worth it anyway. That's already the case.
[15:21] <@wolfsokta> Let's do 10 mins of open Q&A
[15:22] <@wolfsokta> Go...
[15:23] <@Chatturga> Beuller?
[15:24] No questions ... just a comment that the devs and community are great and I'm happy to be a part of it
[15:24] I think everyone moved to discord. I'll throw this out there. How confident is the dev team that things will be ready for oct 31st?
[15:24] <@wolfsokta> Alright! Thanks everybody for joining us today. Let's plan to get back together as a dev group in a couple of weeks.
[15:25] thanks block!
[15:25] <@wolfsokta> Urgo, very confident
[15:25] Please exclude trolls from discord who havent read the whitepaper
[15:25] great :)
[15:25] "things" will be ready..
[15:25] Next time on discord right?
[15:25] woah why discord?
[15:25] some of the suggestions here are horrid
[15:25] this is better less point
[15:25] == blondfrogs [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[15:25] Assets are working well on testnet. Plan is to get as much as we can safely test by Sept 30 -- this includes dev contributions. Oct will be heavy testing and making sure it is safe.
[15:26] people
[15:26] <@wolfsokta> Planning on same time, same IRC channel.
[15:26] == BW_ [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[15:26] @xmr any in particular?
[15:27] (or is "here" discord?)
[15:27] Cheers - Tron
[15:27] "Cheers - Tron" - Tron
submitted by Chatturga to Ravencoin [link] [comments]

Lore v2 QT on Raspberry Pi

To follow up to mindphuk's excellent piece on building the headless client on Raspberry Pi (, I thought if anyone was interested I'd show you how to get the full QT version running on the Pi on the Jessie with Pixel desktop. This works and has been soak tested for several days now on a standard Raspberry Pi 3. I have since added some coins and it stakes a handful of times a day.
Running staking Lore clients paves the way for some of the future use cases of BLK utilising the Bitcoin 0.12 (and newer) core tech, including colored coins. So I'm going to leave this one going indefinitely to kickstart the number of Lore clients staking. It's certainly not mandatory but it will be good in the longer term to have a nice distribution of Lore staking clients.
The cross-compile which lets you create binaries for multiple platforms didn't work for the QT version on the Pi, so there is more to do than just running the binary unfortunately, as below. There are folks working on some much cleaner solutions than this for the Pi, with a custom front end, and where you won't have to do any mucking about. That is coming soon. In the meantime, if you enjoy a fiddle with such things, here's how to get this QT client working on your Pi.
These instructions assume you are starting from scratch with a completely blank OS.
Download Jessie with Pixel from:
Note they have since (August 2017) released a version called 'Stretch' which does not work with this guide. I'll see if I can come up with something new for that at some point and link to it here when I have. In the meantime the guide should work with the Jessie image above.
Unzip the file and extract the .img file to burn it onto Fresh SD card to boot from (to be safe, use 16GB or larger), using a tool like win32diskimager or Etcher.
Assuming you have keyboard/mouse and monitor plugged into your pi, boot it up and the Jessie Desktop will show.
Before we do anything else, you should increase the default swap size on the pi, as compiling certain libraries can exhaust the RAM and get stuck otherwise. To do this, launch a Terminal window and type:
sudo nano /etc/dphys-swapfile 
and Change the CONF_SWAPSIZE from 100 to:
Exit nano with control + x to write out the file.
Then, run the following to restart the swapfile manager:
sudo /etc/init.d/dphys-swapfile stop sudo /etc/init.d/dphys-swapfile start 
Now, launch the browser and download the Lore 2.12 binaries for ARM here:!k2InxZhb!iaLhUPreA7LZqZ-Az-0StRBUshSJ82XjldPsvhGBBH4 (Version with fee fix from 6 September 2017)
(If you prefer to compile it yourself instead, it is possible by following the instructions in the original article by Mindphuk just taking into account this is the newer version of the Lore client than when that was written ( and the versions of Boost and the Berkeley DB need to be the same as below.)
Double click the zip and extract the Lore binary files. Yes, at the moment they are all called 'bitcoin', not 'blackcoin' or 'Lore' - this is because the code derives from a recent bitcoin core implementation so this has not yet been updated. You can place these wherever you like.
In the Terminal window, change directory to where you put the binaries, e.g.:
cd Downloads/lore-raspberrypi-armv7-jessie-pixel chmod +x * 
That marks the binaries as executable.
Now, we need the Boost libraries installed for any of the Lore binaries to work. The project was done with Boost 1.62.0. Unfortunately the Jessie repository only goes up to 1.55, so we need to download and build 1.62 manually on the device.
wget tar -xvzf download cd boost_1_62_0 sudo ./ sudo ./b2 install 
(This will take almost 2 hours. Have a nice cup of tea and a sit down.)
When I came to run the binaries, I found they couldn't find Boost. Running this command fixes that:
sudo ldconfig 
Now we are going to install the packages which aren't already included in the default OS installation which the binaries need in order to run:
sudo apt-get install qrencode libprotobuf-dev libevent-pthreads-2.0-5 
Now we need to install the Berkeley Database version 6.2.23. This is the version Lore v2 uses. Bitcoin still uses 4.8 which is 10 years old! This doesn't take too long.
wget tar -xvzf db-6.2.23.tar.gz cd db-6.2.23/build_unix ../dist/configure --prefix=/usr --enable-compat185 --enable-dbm --disable-static --enable-cxx 
I find this next section of the Berkeley instructions worked better just switching to root, which can be fudged by running sudo su before the rest:
sudo su make make docdir=/usshare/doc/db-6.2.23 install chown -v -R root:root /usbin/db_* /usinclude/db{,_185,_cxx}.h /uslib/libdb*.{so,la} /usshare/doc/db-6.2.23 
Now we're going to go up a couple of directories to where the binaries were:
cd ../.. 
Then run the client!
And there you have it. Should hopefully end up looking a bit like this:
Using the Bootstrap can save a while syncing. Download it at:
Place the bootstrap.dat file into the ~/.lore directory.
Run ./bitcoin-qt again, it will say 'Importing Blocks' rather than 'Synchronising with Network'. My pi sync'ed fully in about 5-6 hours.
If you want peace of mind that Lore will always start on bootup into the Jessie w/Pixel desktop (i.e. after a power cycle), then you need to create a .desktop file in the following place.
sudo nano ~/.config/autostart/Lore.desktop 
And in it, enter the following (tailoring the Exec line below to the whereabouts of your bitcoin-qt file):
[Desktop Entry] Name=Blackcoin Lore Comment=Mining without the waste Exec=/home/pi/Downloads/lore-raspberrypi-armv7-jessie-pixel/bitcoin-qt Type=Application Encoding=UTF-8 Terminal=false Categories=None; 
Power usage and payback time
After a good while leaving it going by itself, the CPU load averages got down to almost zero, all of the time. Idling, the Pi uses a bit less than 3 watts. This means it would take two weeks to use one 1Kw/h of electricity.
If you pay e.g. 12.5 cents a unit, that's what you'd expect this to cost to run in a fortnight. That's around $0.25 a month or $3 a year. Green and cheap and helping to secure the BLK network. I paid for the year's worth of electricity in 2 days staking with 25k BLK. Makes mining look silly, huh? ;)
Securing your Pi
With staking, your wallet needs to be unlocked and as such, the keys to your wallet are on the device. In a clean and newly installed environment as described above, and if you don't allow others to use your device and there is no other software or nasties running on it, there is no real cause for concern. However, there are some basic security precautions you can take.
Firstly, if you have enabled SSH and are playing with your pi across your LAN (or worse, the Internet), you should immediately change the password for the default 'pi' user (which is preconfigured to be 'raspberry'). Simply log in as normal, then type:
You'll be prompted to enter the old and the new passwords.
Security by default
Your Pi is likely, by default, to not be exposed to incoming connections from the outside world because your router is likely generating a private address range for your LAN (192.168.x.x or 10.0.x.x or 172.x.x.x) which means all incoming connections are effectively blocked at the router anyway unless you set up a 'port forward' record to allow packets arriving on certain ports to be forwarded to a specific internal IP address.
As for accessing your Pi across the internet, if you have set up a port forward, this likely has security ramifications. Even basic old fashioned protocols have proven in recent times to have uncaught flaws, so it's always advisable to lock down your device as much as possible, and even if you only plan to access the Pi over your LAN, install a firewall to configure this. I used one called ufw, because it's literally an uncomplicated firewall.
sudo apt-get install ufw sudo ufw allow from to any port 22 sudo ufw --force enable 
This allows just port 22 (SSH) to be open on the Pi to any device on my LAN's subnet (192.168.0.x). You can change the above to a single IP address if paranoid, or add several lines, if you want to lock it down to your LAN and a specific external static IP address (e.g. a VPN service you use). To find out what subnet your router uses, just type:
and you'll see on the interface you are using (either hard wired or wifi) the 192.168 or 10. or 172. prefix. Change the above rule so it matches the first two octets correctly (e.g. if you're on a 10.0. address).
You may already use VNC to access your Pi's desktop across your LAN, this uses port 5900. Add a line like above to lock it down to an internal address. It's not a good idea to expose this port to the wider world because those connections are not encrypted and potentially could be subjected to a MITM attack.
You can query the status of the firewall like this:
ufw status 
And of course, try connecting remotely once you change the rules to see what works. You should consult the official documentation for further options:
Back up & Recovery
There are again many ways to tackle this so I'll just speak about my basic precautions in this regard. Don't take it as a be-all-and-end-all!
The wallet.dat file is the key file (literally) containing all the private/public keys and transactions. This can be found in:
You can navigate there using Jessie w/Pixel's own file manager or in a terminal window (cd ~/.lore). You can copy this file or, if you'd rather keep a plain text file of all your public and private keys, use the 'dumpwallet' command in the console. In Lore, go to Help > Debug Window > Console and type 'dumpwallet myfilename' where myfilename is the file you want it to spit out with all your keys in it. This file will end up in the same place you launch bitcoin-qt from.
The instructions earlier on, when running Lore for the first time intentionally left out encrypting your wallet.dat file because in order for the wallet to stake upon startup, it needs to have a decrypted key already. This isn't perfect, but after a power cycle, it would never stake unless you left it decrypted. So the best practice here is as soon as the wallet.dat file has left your device, i.e. you copy it to a USB stick for example, put it in an encrypted folder or drive (or both).
In Windows, one way is to use Bitlocker drive encryption for the entire drive. You should follow the instructions here to encrypt your flash drive before your wallet.dat is on there, and don't forget the password!!
On the Mac, I use a software package called Concealer to encrypt files I store on the Mac itself:   There are almost certainly free packages with similar functionality, I have just used that one for years.
Either way, if you want to just make sure your USB drive is encrypted, you can do so in one-click in Finder before you put the sensitive files on it:
Note that these disk encryption methods may mean having to access the USB stick on a PC or Mac in order to retrieve the files in the event of a disaster. Be aware this may mean exposing them to more security issues if your computer is in any way compromised or someone nefarious has access to your computer. There are more 'manual' ways of backing up and recovering, such as literally writing down private/public key pairs which this guide doesn't go into, but may suit you better if paranoid about your setup.
The wallet.dat file has everything in it you need to recover your wallet, or if you used 'dumpwallet', the file you saved out has all the keys.
Wallet.dat method: Install Lore as normal then replace any auto-generated wallet.dat in ~/.lore directory with your backup. If a lot of time has elapsed and many transactions have occurred since your backup, launch lore with:
./bitcoin-qt -rescan 
And if that doesn't do the job, do a full reindex of the blockchain:
./bitcoin-qt -reindex 
If you used the dumpwallet command, install Lore then place the file containing all the keys that you saved out in the same directory as bitcoin-qt. In Lore, go to Help > Debug Window > Console and type 'importwallet myfilename' where myfilename is that file containing all the keys. The wallet should automatically rescan for transactions at that point and you should be good to go.
There are a million ways to do effective security and disaster recovery, but I hope this shows you a couple of basic precautionary ways. There are discussions about better ways to stake without compromising too much security which are happening all the time and developments in this regard will happen in time.
In the meantime, feel free to comment with your best practices.
submitted by patcrypt to blackcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin-development Digest, Vol 48, Issue 41 | Damian Gomez | May 08 2015

Damian Gomez on May 08 2015:
Well zombie txns aside, I expect this to be resolved w/ a client side
implementation using a Merkle-Winternitz OTS in order to prevent the loss
of fee structure theougth the implementation of a this security hash that
eill alloow for a one-wya transaction to conitnue, according to the TESLA
We can then tally what is needed to compute tteh number of bit desginated
for teh completion og the client-side signature if discussin the
construcitons of a a DH key (instead of the BIP X509 protocol)
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 2:08 PM, <
bitcoin-development-request at> wrote:
Send Bitcoin-development mailing list submissions to
bitcoin-development at
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
bitcoin-development-request at
You can reach the person managing the list at
bitcoin-development-owner at
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Bitcoin-development digest..."
Today's Topics:
  1. Re: Block Size Increase (Mark Friedenbach)
  2. Softfork signaling improvements (Douglas Roark)
  3. Re: Block Size Increase (Mark Friedenbach)
  4. Re: Block Size Increase (Raystonn) (Damian Gomez)
  5. Re: Block Size Increase (Raystonn)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mark Friedenbach <mark at>
To: Raystonn <raystonn at>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development at>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 13:55:30 -0700
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase
The problems with that are larger than time being unreliable. It is no
longer reorg-safe as transactions can expire in the course of a reorg and
any transaction built on the now expired transaction is invalidated.
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Raystonn <raystonn at> wrote:
Replace by fee is what I was referencing. End-users interpret the old
transaction as expired. Hence the nomenclature. An alternative is a new
feature that operates in the reverse of time lock, expiring a transaction
after a specific time. But time is a bit unreliable in the blockchain
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Douglas Roark <doug at>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development at>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 15:27:26 -0400
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Softfork signaling improvements
Hash: SHA512
Hello. I've seen Greg make a couple of posts online
is one such example) where he has mentioned that Pieter has a new
proposal for allowing multiple softforks to be deployed at the same
time. As discussed in the thread I linked, the idea seems simple
enough. Still, I'm curious if the actual proposal has been posted
anywhere. I spent a few minutes searching the usual suspects (this
mailing list, Reddit, Bitcointalk, IRC logs, BIPs) and can't find
Douglas Roark
Senior Developer
Armory Technologies, Inc.
doug at
PGP key ID: 92ADC0D7
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools -
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mark Friedenbach <mark at>
To: "Raystonn ." <raystonn at>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development at>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 13:40:50 -0700
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase
Transactions don't expire. But if the wallet is online, it can
periodically choose to release an already created transaction with a higher
fee. This requires replace-by-fee to be sufficiently deployed, however.
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Raystonn . <raystonn at> wrote:
I have a proposal for wallets such as yours. How about creating all
transactions with an expiration time starting with a low fee, then
replacing with new transactions that have a higher fee as time passes.
Users can pick the fee curve they desire based on the transaction priority
they want to advertise to the network. Users set the priority in the
wallet, and the wallet software translates it to a specific fee curve used
in the series of expiring transactions. In this manner, transactions are
never left hanging for days, and probably not even for hours.
On 8 May 2015 1:17 pm, Aaron Voisine <voisine at> wrote:
As the author of a popular SPV wallet, I wanted to weigh in, in support
of the Gavin's 20Mb block proposal.
The best argument I've heard against raising the limit is that we need
fee pressure. I agree that fee pressure is the right way to economize on
scarce resources. Placing hard limits on block size however is an
incredibly disruptive way to go about this, and will severely negatively
impact users' experience.
When users pay too low a fee, they should:
1) See immediate failure as they do now with fees that fail to propagate.
2) If the fee lower than it should be but not terminal, they should see
degraded performance, long delays in confirmation, but eventual success.
This will encourage them to pay higher fees in future.
The worst of all worlds would be to have transactions propagate, hang in
limbo for days, and then fail. This is the most important scenario to
avoid. Increasing the 1Mb block size limit I think is the simplest way to
avoid this least desirable scenario for the immediate future.
We can play around with improved transaction selection for blocks and
encourage miners to adopt it to discourage low fees and create fee
pressure. These could involve hybrid priority/fee selection so low fee
transactions see degraded performance instead of failure. This would be the
conservative low risk approach.
Aaron Voisine
co-founder and CEO
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.;117567292;y
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development at
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Damian Gomez <dgomez1092 at>
To: bitcoin-development at
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 14:04:10 -0700
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase (Raystonn)
I was reading some of the thread but can't say I read the entire thing.
I think that it is realistic to cinsider a nlock sixe of 20MB for any
block txn to occur. THis is an enormous amount of data (relatively for a
netwkrk) in which the avergage rate of 10tps over 10 miniutes would allow
for fewasible transformation of data at this curent point in time.
Though I do not see what extra hash information would be stored in the
overall ecosystem as we begin to describe what the scripts that are
atacrhed tp the blockchain would carry,
I'd therefore think that for the remainder of this year that it is
possible to have a block chain within 200 - 300 bytes that is more
charatereistic of some feasible attempts at attaching nuanced data in order
to keep propliifc the blockchain but have these identifiers be integral
OPSIg of the the entiore block. THe reasoning behind this has to do with
encryption standards that can be added toe a chain such as th DH algoritnm
keys that would allow for a higher integrity level withinin the system as
it is. Cutrent;y tyh prootocl oomnly controls for the amount of
transactions through if TxnOut script and the publin key coming form teh
lcoation of the proof-of-work. Form this then I think that a rate of higher
than then current standard of 92bytes allows for GPUS ie CUDA to perfirm
its standard operations of 1216 flops in rde rto mechanize a new
personal identity within the chain that also attaches an encrypted instance
of a further categorical variable that we can prsribved to it.
I think with the current BIP7 prootclol for transactions there is an area
of vulnerability for man-in-the-middle attacks upon request of bitcin to
any merchant as is. It would contraidct the security of the bitcoin if it
was intereceptefd iand not allowed to reach tthe payment network or if the
hash was reveresed in orfr to change the value it had. Therefore the
current best fit block size today is between 200 - 300 bytws (depending on
how exciteed we get)
Thanks for letting me join the conversation
I welcomes any vhalleneged and will reply with more research as i figure
out what problems are revealed in my current formation of thoughts (sorry
for the errors but i am just trying to move forward - THE DELRERT KEY
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Raystonn <raystonn at>
To: Mark Friedenbach <mark at>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development at>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 14:01:28 -0700
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase
Replace by fee is the better approach. It will ultimately replace zombie
transactions (due to insufficient fee) with potentially much higher fees as
the feature takes hold in wallets throughout the network, and fee
competition increases. However, this does not fix the problem of low tps.
In fact, as blocks fill it could make the problem worse. This feature
means more transactions after all. So I would expect huge fee spikes, or a
return to zombie transactions if fee caps are implemented by wallets.
On 8 May 2015 1:55 pm, Mark Friedenbach <mark at> wrote:
The problems with that are larger than time being unreliable. It is no
longer reorg-safe as transactions can expire in the course of a reorg and
any transaction built on the now expired transaction is invalidated.
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Raystonn <raystonn at> wrote:
Replace by fee is what I was referencing. End-users interpret the old
transaction as expired. Hence the nomenclature. An alternative is a new
feature that operates in the reverse of time lock, expiring a transaction
after a specific time. But time is a bit unreliable in the blockchain
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.;117567292;y
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>
submitted by bitcoin-devlist-bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

How to move Bitcoin data directory on MAC OSX to external drive.

Assumptions: A) Your current folder for your bitcoin data is here: "~/Library/Application Support/Bitcoin" or here "/Users//Library/Application Support/Bitcoin" B) Your current folder for your bitcoin-qt application is here: /Applications/ C) You have an external drive named "My Passport" and your Finder, Preferences settings are set to display Devices. Select Finder, Preferences and tick the box to the left of External disks.
To do this on a MAC running OSX 10.9 follow these instructions: 1)Open Finder. 2) In Finder, using the Finder menu bar, select: Go, Go To Folder... , and type the ~/Library and press RETURN. 3) In Finder, navigate to the "Application Support" folder. You will see the Bitcoin directory. 4) In Finder, select, or highlight, this folder, then select: Edit, Copy "Bitcoin" from menu bar. 5) In Finder, navigate to your external drive "My Passport". 6) In Finder, create a folder called "Applications" on your "My Passport" external drive (see step "C" above after connecting external drive, if necessary). 7) In Finder, navigate to the newly created "Applications" directory. 8 ) In Finder, select Edit, Paste Item to start copying the "Bitcoin" directory to your external drive's "/Volumes/My Passport/Applications/" folder. 9) Once this completes and both the "~/Library/Application Support/Bitcoin" and "/Volumes/My Passport/Applications/Bitcoin" folders are identical. Rename the Bitcoin directory in "~/Library/Application Support/Bitcoin" to "~/Library/Application Support/BitcoinOLD". 10) Launch Terminal from LaunchPad, Utilities or from Applications in Finder. 11) CAREFUL: At the Terminal prompt type: "cd ~/Library/Application\ Support" no quotes. Yes, that "\" slash is necessary. 12) Type: "ls -laf" no quotes, and insure that the Bitcoin directory is now called BitcoinOLD. 13) Type: "ln -s /Volumes/My\ Passport/Applications/Bitcoin/ ./Bitcoin" no quotes. this command actually creates a symbolic link to your external drive. Yes, that slash "\" just after the "My" is necessary to account for the space in "My Passport". 14) Launch Bitcoin-qt from Applications in Finder and let the "Reindexing blocks on disk.." process complete. It should not be downloading anything until this completes and then will download only those blocks since your last synchronize to the Bitcoin network. 15) Once this completes, delete the BitcoinOLD folder using finder. "~/Library/Application Support/BitcoinOLD". Was this helpful? Donate: 1FCZzLuH1MAa8UDaHnZKHnXmNcQRBA7Xme
submitted by duncwaj to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Core 0.12.1 released | Wladimir J. van der Laan | Apr 15 2016

Wladimir J. van der Laan on Apr 15 2016:
Hash: SHA512
Bitcoin Core version 0.12.1 is now available from:
Or through bittorrent:
This is a new minor version release, including the BIP9, BIP68 and BIP112
softfork, various bugfixes and updated translations.
Please report bugs using the issue tracker at github:
To receive security and update notifications, please subscribe to
Upgrading and downgrading

How to Upgrade
If you are running an older version, shut it down. Wait until it has completely
shut down (which might take a few minutes for older versions), then run the
installer (on Windows) or just copy over /Applications/Bitcoin-Qt (on Mac) or
bitcoind/bitcoin-qt (on Linux).
Downgrade warning

Downgrade to a version < 0.12.0

Because release 0.12.0 and later will obfuscate the chainstate on every
fresh sync or reindex, the chainstate is not backwards-compatible with
pre-0.12 versions of Bitcoin Core or other software.
If you want to downgrade after you have done a reindex with 0.12.0 or later,
you will need to reindex when you first start Bitcoin Core version 0.11 or
Notable changes

First version bits BIP9 softfork deployment
This release includes a soft fork deployment to enforce BIP68,
BIP112 and BIP113 using the BIP9 deployment mechanism.
The deployment sets the block version number to 0x20000001 between
midnight 1st May 2016 and midnight 1st May 2017 to signal readiness for
deployment. The version number consists of 0x20000000 to indicate version
bits together with setting bit 0 to indicate support for this combined
deployment, shown as "csv" in the getblockchaininfo RPC call.
For more information about the soft forking change, please see
This specific backport pull-request can be viewed at
BIP68 soft fork to enforce sequence locks for relative locktime
BIP68 introduces relative lock-time consensus-enforced semantics of
the sequence number field to enable a signed transaction input to remain
invalid for a defined period of time after confirmation of its corresponding
For more information about the implementation, see
BIP112 soft fork to enforce OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY
BIP112 redefines the existing OP_NOP3 as OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY (CSV)
for a new opcode in the Bitcoin scripting system that in combination with
BIP68 allows execution pathways of a script to be restricted based
on the age of the output being spent.
For more information about the implementation, see
BIP113 locktime enforcement soft fork
Bitcoin Core 0.11.2 previously introduced mempool-only locktime
enforcement using GetMedianTimePast(). This release seeks to
consensus enforce the rule.
Bitcoin transactions currently may specify a locktime indicating when
they may be added to a valid block. Current consensus rules require
that blocks have a block header time greater than the locktime specified
in any transaction in that block.
Miners get to choose what time they use for their header time, with the
consensus rule being that no node will accept a block whose time is more
than two hours in the future. This creates a incentive for miners to
set their header times to future values in order to include locktimed
transactions which weren't supposed to be included for up to two more
The consensus rules also specify that valid blocks may have a header
time greater than that of the median of the 11 previous blocks. This
GetMedianTimePast() time has a key feature we generally associate with
time: it can't go backwards.
BIP113 specifies a soft fork enforced in this release that
weakens this perverse incentive for individual miners to use a future
time by requiring that valid blocks have a computed GetMedianTimePast()
greater than the locktime specified in any transaction in that block.
Mempool inclusion rules currently require transactions to be valid for
immediate inclusion in a block in order to be accepted into the mempool.
This release begins applying the BIP113 rule to received transactions,
so transaction whose time is greater than the GetMedianTimePast() will
no longer be accepted into the mempool.
Implication for miners: you will begin rejecting transactions that
would not be valid under BIP113, which will prevent you from producing
invalid blocks when BIP113 is enforced on the network. Any
transactions which are valid under the current rules but not yet valid
under the BIP113 rules will either be mined by other miners or delayed
until they are valid under BIP113. Note, however, that time-based
locktime transactions are more or less unseen on the network currently.
Implication for users: GetMedianTimePast() always trails behind the
current time, so a transaction locktime set to the present time will be
rejected by nodes running this release until the median time moves
forward. To compensate, subtract one hour (3,600 seconds) from your
locktimes to allow those transactions to be included in mempools at
approximately the expected time.
For more information about the implementation, see
The p2p alert system is off by default. To turn on, use -alert with
startup configuration.
0.12.1 Change log

Detailed release notes follow. This overview includes changes that affect
behavior, not code moves, refactors and string updates. For convenience in locating
the code changes and accompanying discussion, both the pull request and
git merge commit are mentioned.

RPC and other APIs

  • - #7739 7ffc2bd Add abandoned status to listtransactions (jonasschnelli)

Block and transaction handling

  • - #7543 834aaef Backport BIP9, BIP68 and BIP112 with softfork (btcdrak)

P2P protocol and network code

    • #7804 90f1d24 Track block download times per individual block (sipa)
    • #7832 4c3a00d Reduce block timeout to 10 minutes (laanwj)


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

Build system

    • #7487 00d57b4 Workaround Travis-side CI issues (luke-jr)
    • #7606 a10da9a No need to set -L and --location for curl (MarcoFalke)
    • #7614 ca8f160 Add curl to packages (now needed for depends) (luke-jr)
    • #7776 a784675 Remove unnecessary executables from gitian release (laanwj)


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


    • #7617 f04f4fd Fix markdown syntax and line terminate LogPrint (MarcoFalke)
    • #7747 4d035bc added depends cross compile info (accraze)
    • #7741 a0cea89 Mark p2p alert system as deprecated (btcdrak)
    • #7780 c5f94f6 Disable bad-chain alert (btcdrak)

Thanks to everyone who directly contributed to this release:
    • accraze
    • Alex Morcos
    • BtcDrak
    • Jonas Schnelli
    • Luke Dashjr
    • MarcoFalke
    • Mark Friedenbach
    • NicolasDorier
    • Pieter Wuille
    • Suhas Daftuar
    • Wladimir J. van der Laan
As well as everyone that helped translating on Transifex.
Version: GnuPG v1
submitted by dev_list_bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

Bitcoin mining setup on Mountain Lion throwing an error...

Hey all... I am getting an error when I attempt to start up bit coin on my Mountain Lion setup... Agamemnon:poclbm JP$ /Applications/ -server & [1] 46626 Agamemnon:poclbm JP$ python /Applications/poclbm/ -u XXXX --pass XXXX -d 0libc++abi.dylib: terminate called throwing an exception
Traceback (most recent call last): File "/Applications/poclbm/", line 3, in from BitcoinMiner import * File "/Applications/poclbm/", line 4, in from log import * ImportError: No module named log [1]+ Abort trap: 6 /Applications/ -server
I have googled the above error with little success. Anyone else out there using mountain Lion? If this helps, I installed the latest bitcoin which is called bitcoin QT. The docs I have for mining setup dictate to edit the bit coin.conf file and add "echo "rpcuser=username" > ~/Library/Application\ Support/Bitcoin/bitcoin.conf echo "rpcpassword=password" >> ~/Library/Application\ Support/Bitcoin/bitcoin.conf"
There was not a bit coin.conf file, so I created it and added the two requisite lines above.
Still get the error "abi.dylib: terminate called throwing an exception" and bit coin crashes.
Any help out there?
Thank you..
submitted by Chowderwhore to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

How to get a bitcoin wallet  What is the best bitcoin wallet?  Bitcoin wallet review How to fix Zcoin no block source error in QT wallet How to prune the blockchain in Bitcoin-Qt Start Mining Dogecoin With Your Mac in Under 5 Minutes How To Open a Bitcoin Wallet

Bitcoin mining rigs and systems have come a long way since the beginning. The first Bitcoin miners made do with the tools they had at their disposal and set up various software to control the mining hardware in their rigs. While these make-shift solutions were better than nothing, they didn’t exactly work efficiently. Not only did that slow down the mining process, but it also made it ... Restart Bitcoin Core. If you plan to run Armory on Mac, skip this step. With no default data directory, Bitcoin Core assumes that this is its first session. Launching Bitcoin Core should yield a welcome screen. This screen gives you to option to store data in the default location or a custom location. Select the second option. Then Click the “…” button to point to the new location of the ... More Mac Bitcoin Malware Being Distributed and Manual Instructions for Removing It . By Bryan Chaffin. Feb 12th, 2014 9:12 PM EST. A recent trojan designed to steal your Bitcoins has expanded to ... I'm not familiar enough with the way Bitcoin-Qt utilizes libboost_thread-mt.dylib to be certain on this, however. To check for the presence of the malware on your system: 1. First off, you probably want to take a screenshot of these instructions or something, and disconnect your system from the internet, until you've verified that your system is clean. 2. Open Activity Monitor (located in your ... Terminal is an application for communicating with a Mac, not through the usual graphics and gestures, but through text commands. Access the terminal by pressing ⌘‑space. This pulls up a system-wide search box. Typing the word “terminal” should reveal an option for the Terminal application. Clicking this option launches the terminal. Your terminal will look somewhat different from mine ...

[index] [5295] [31152] [47429] [38982] [26442] [46001] [44027] [42011] [47990] [38756]

How to get a bitcoin wallet What is the best bitcoin wallet? Bitcoin wallet review

Installing Electrum Wallet for Bitcoin (BTC) on a Mac. If you have any further questions, please comment bellow, I will do my best to answer it. If you think my accent is funny, we have something ... Standalone Bitcoin Offline Wallet Printer This is a demo of a protoype bitcoin paper wallet printer I have built. bitcoin bitcoin value bitcoin exchange rate... iphone bitcoin wallet, mac bitcoin wallet, my bitcoin wallet, paypal bitcoin wallet, raspberry pi bitcoin wallet, bitcoin google wallet, hack bitcoin wallet, bitcoin wallet ios, bitcoin wallet ... Copy & Paste Videos and Earn $100 to $300 Per Day - FULL TUTORIAL (Make Money Online) - Duration: 22:51. BIG MARK Recommended for you Hi, today I teach you how to mine crypto-currencies like Bitcoin or Monero, in a fast and easy way. Download the miner: Extra info : Create your ...