Nostr notes by

📅 Original date posted:2014-07-04 📝 Original message:On ...

2023-06-07T17:23:34+02:00

In reply to nevent1q…ause
_________________________

📅 Original date posted:2014-07-04
📝 Original message:On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 06:53:47AM -0400, Alan Reiner wrote:

> Something similar could be applied to your idea. We use the hash of a
> prevBlockHash||nonce as the starting point for 1,000,000 lookup
> operations. The output of the previous lookup is used to determine
> which block and tx (perhaps which chunk of 32 bytes within that tx) is
> used for the next lookup operation. This means that in order to do the
> hashing, you need the entire blockchain available to you, even though
> you'll only be using a small fraction of it for each "hash". This might
> achieve what you're describing without actually requiring the full 20 GB
> of reading on ever hash.

Anything involving lots of unpredictable memory accesses to a large
chunk of fast memory is unASICable. That data vector could be derived
by the same means as an one time pad, and loaded and locked into
memory after boot. If you make it large enough it won't profit from
embedded RAM bandwidth/speedup. The only way to speed up would be clustering,
which doesn't offer economies of scale.

📅 Original date posted:2014-05-20 📝 Original message:On ...

2023-06-07T17:21:49+02:00

In reply to nevent1q…fp2s
_________________________

📅 Original date posted:2014-05-20
📝 Original message:On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:15:44AM +0200, bitcoingrant at gmx.com wrote:
> Recently China has updated its firewall blocking bitcoin sites and pools.
> Whether this is simple blacklist or more sophisticated packet targeting is
> uncertain, however this update did spefically target VPN handshakes.

Could a blockchain fork due to network split happen?

📅 Original date posted:2013-11-15 📝 Original message:On ...

2023-06-07T17:09:41+02:00

In reply to nevent1q…t2l8
_________________________

📅 Original date posted:2013-11-15
📝 Original message:On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 01:37:56AM -0800, Alex Kravets wrote:
> Hi guys,

Alex, you're top-posting and not trimming your replies.

> I've seen many many non-geeks be utterly intimidated and confused by
> 0.000XXXXX quantities and/or mBTC & uBTC notation

Yes, people really can't tell any difference between
mm, cm, m, dm and km. Not.

>
> Yes, $10 being rougnly 10,000 Won in South Korean is a great example where
> large amounts of units work very well in a major economy.

You're trying to invent a new symbol for the same unit, instead
of using an established, generic system of prefixes.
That's pretty insane.

>
> FWIW, I would prefer the entire switch-over be done *once* *and *at the
> same time switching both BTC to XBT and using the following

I would prefer that nobody does any such silly thing.

>
> Currency Code *: *XBT
> Unit Definition *: *1 Bit = 100 Satoshis
>
> Addition benefit is splitting the term Bitcoin/bitcoin (as in Network and
> currency unit) into Bitcoin (network) and Bit (the unit).

Bitcoin is not measured in bits. Bits are units of information, and
are measured in bits, kbits, Mbits, Gbits, Tbits, Pbits etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate

>
> Perhaps this project/process should have a name and be listed on a road map
> somewhere

What would a sane person think if he saw that on the roadmap, you think?

> *BRCS: *Bitcoin Re-denomination and [Currency] Code Standardization project

Ever heard of SI unit prefixes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_prefix

>
> Cheers ...
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:23 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 05:53:16PM -0500, Alan Reiner wrote:
> > > I really like the XBT idea. It makes a lot of sense to match the ISO
> >
> > I really don't. Just use the SI prefixes.
> >
> > > currency symbol (though the ISO guys will have to adjust the way they've
> > > defined the "XBT"). And I do agree that going right to uBTC and
> > > skipping mBTC makes sense, too.
> >
> > The display units should be choosable by the user.
> >
> > > I'd prefer them not be called "micro bitcoins." I really want to call
> > > them "microbes" ... but I'm not sure that has the right flavor for money
> >
> > Why on earth?
> >
> > > transfer :) "Please give me 872 microbes". Perhaps we just call them
> > > "bits." Or even "micros" or "microbits". As I write this, I realize
> > > there's probably 872 threads on the forums about this already...
> > >
> > > But we would want to promote a consistent term, to avoid further
> > > confusion when people use different names for the new unit. It's not
> > > guaranteed to be successful, but if we pick a good name, and build it
> > > into the interface on the first release pushing the new unit, we have a
> > > chance to make the transition even easier.
> >
> > The reason SI prefixes were invented is exactly to preven that case.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
> > OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access
> > Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
> > Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alex Kravets <http://www.linkedin.com/in/akravets>; def redPill = '
> Scala <http://www.scala-lang.org/>;
> [[ brutal honesty <http://goo.gl/vwydt>; is the best policy ]]

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
> OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access
> Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
> Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk

> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

📅 Original date posted:2013-11-15 📝 Original message:On ...

2023-06-07T17:09:40+02:00

In reply to nevent1q…5h7k
_________________________

📅 Original date posted:2013-11-15
📝 Original message:On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 05:53:16PM -0500, Alan Reiner wrote:
> I really like the XBT idea. It makes a lot of sense to match the ISO

I really don't. Just use the SI prefixes.

> currency symbol (though the ISO guys will have to adjust the way they've
> defined the "XBT"). And I do agree that going right to uBTC and
> skipping mBTC makes sense, too.

The display units should be choosable by the user.

> I'd prefer them not be called "micro bitcoins." I really want to call
> them "microbes" ... but I'm not sure that has the right flavor for money

Why on earth?

> transfer :) "Please give me 872 microbes". Perhaps we just call them
> "bits." Or even "micros" or "microbits". As I write this, I realize
> there's probably 872 threads on the forums about this already...
>
> But we would want to promote a consistent term, to avoid further
> confusion when people use different names for the new unit. It's not
> guaranteed to be successful, but if we pick a good name, and build it
> into the interface on the first release pushing the new unit, we have a
> chance to make the transition even easier.

The reason SI prefixes were invented is exactly to preven that case.