Topic: [ANN] SCRYPT HARD FORK BLOCK ON 256000 - page 2. (Read 4040 times)
Oh you're right, I was thinking of brain wallets.
So this would use SHA to convert private -> public keys but SCRYPT to show proof of work?
Nothing uses SHA to "convert" private keys to public keys. Hashing algorithms are not public key cryptography. Bitcoin (and LTC and every single scamCoin copy) uses ECDSA for generating keypairs (private & public keys) as well as creating and verifying signatures necessary to spend coins.
So this would use SHA to convert private -> public keys but SCRYPT to show proof of work?
I'd say the only people really against this right now are ASIC owners. Sucks for them but 'securing the blockchain' is really just fancy speak for trying to hold a monopoly on hashing power and screw the little guy. A BTC fork to scrypt has been discussed for a while now and was even recommended by the guy who made the BTC hashcash algo. There is very good reason to do this unless you WANT the future of BTC to be in the hands of ASICS.
Being in the hands of major GPU farms is somehow "superior". Don't give me the "anyone with a single GPU can mine Scrypt". If Bitcoin used Scrypt the difficulty would be so high that a single miner would make a token amount (as they should given their small hardware investment) much like a USB ASIC miner today makes a token amount.
The parameters for Scrypt used by LTC (et all) are memory weak. They only use 128KB of memory. That is more than possible to acheive with an ASIC at reasonable cost. If BTC used Scrypt there would be Scrypt based ASICS. If LTC grows large enough to warrant the investment and risk there will be Scrypt based ASICs.
Quote
In my opinion one of the major reasons litecoin and the alts have gained so much traction IS the ASIC problem BTC has now.
What traction?
http://coinmarketcap.com/
Bitcoin is 96%+ of the combined "market cap" (as much as I hate that word).
BTC & LTC combined are >99%.
The other 50+ scamCoins are <1% combined.
(BTW I exclude Ripple as well it is PayPal 2.0)
Name a significant vendor that accepts a crypto-currency that doesn't accept BTC.
Name a major exchange which doesn't accept and altCoin but doesn't accept BTC.
Show me a day where there was more altCoin coverage in mainstream media than BTC coverage.
An alliance of a few loudmouth butt hurt GPU miner and pump and dump scammers isn't "traction".
I'd say the only people really against this right now are ASIC owners. Sucks for them but 'securing the blockchain' is really just fancy speak for trying to hold a monopoly on hashing power and screw the little guy. A BTC fork to scrypt has been discussed for a while now and was even recommended by the guy who made the BTC hashcash algo. There is very good reason to do this unless you WANT the future of BTC to be in the hands of ASICS.
In my opinion one of the major reasons litecoin and the alts have gained so much traction IS the ASIC problem BTC has now.
In my opinion one of the major reasons litecoin and the alts have gained so much traction IS the ASIC problem BTC has now.
you guys are quite unintelligent if you guys can't figure out that ASICS for scrypt WILL come out.
if you guys do understand that than you guys are borderline morons.
go enjoy your altcoins (litecoin is more or less fine)
alt coins have gained NO traction they are 99.5% speculation and nothing more than that
this is the dumbest post EVER.
if dude wants to use scrypt go mine or buy some litecoins etc...... or is that too expensive for OP and he wants to make some $$ the easy way.
lame not thought out thread
there are more than enough "scrypt coins" for you guys to enjoy already.
dumb is dumb
if dude wants to use scrypt go mine or buy some litecoins etc...... or is that too expensive for OP and he wants to make some $$ the easy way.
lame not thought out thread
there are more than enough "scrypt coins" for you guys to enjoy already.
dumb is dumb
I'd say the only people really against this right now are ASIC owners. Sucks for them but 'securing the blockchain' is really just fancy speak for trying to hold a monopoly on hashing power and screw the little guy. A BTC fork to scrypt has been discussed for a while now and was even recommended by the guy who made the BTC hashcash algo. There is very good reason to do this unless you WANT the future of BTC to be in the hands of ASICS.
In my opinion one of the major reasons litecoin and the alts have gained so much traction IS the ASIC problem BTC has now.
In my opinion one of the major reasons litecoin and the alts have gained so much traction IS the ASIC problem BTC has now.
will this include the blockchain of btc? ie, if so i can spend my btc twice 
Yes.
I for one will be selling all my BTC on the fork right after block 256,000. I have a standing offer to sell them for 10% of market price for the real fork. Any takers? Pre-orders available.
out of interest, is this possible?
ANYTHING is POSSIBLE with a hard fork. You can't "change" Bitcoin you can simply make a modified fork.
Want the block reward to be 38i378932372891372189 BTC per block?
Want to remove the coin limit?
Want to make tx reversible?
Want to
Want to make the network less secure because you are butthurt over ASICS?
Want to (insert idiotic change here)?
Make a fork. Technically it is that simple.
The real difficulty is getting people to use your fork.
At block 256,000 my guess is 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of people will consider the original fork "Bitcoin" and the new fork will die off quickly. MtGox won't be accepting coins from the fork (and neither will any exchange), no major merchants will be accepting coins from the fork, the overwhelming majority of users won't be using clients for the new fork, no major pool is going to drop support of the real Bitcoin in favor of the fork.
This is what people mean by "it is nearly impossible to change Bitcoin". It isn't technically difficult. Change a couple lines of code, compile and distribute. It is difficult because most people simply will CHOOSE not to upgrade to the incompatible fork. There is no mechanism anyone (not even core developers) can use to FORCE users to upgrade to an incompatible fork. Both networks will exist as long as 1 or more node is running on them and people will make a choice.
The new scrypt wallet sounds like a good place to stick a trojan. I assume you'll want us to import all of our private keys, right?
compile it yourself
Have you even seen the Bitcoin source? A lot of lines to vet!
I like how the only real "advantage" Litecoin has over Bitcoin is GPU mining. What is really sad and depressing about these Litecoin advocates is that Script ASIC's most likely already exist and have a similar hashrate gap as SHA GPU - ASIC gap.
The advantage part is in quotes because, as discussed by many Bitcoin developers these so called advantages are non-existent and to be honest, the Script worship here reminds me of church.
The advantage part is in quotes because, as discussed by many Bitcoin developers these so called advantages are non-existent and to be honest, the Script worship here reminds me of church.
The new scrypt wallet sounds like a good place to stick a trojan. I assume you'll want us to import all of our private keys, right?
compile it yourself,,
The new scrypt wallet sounds like a good place to stick a trojan. I assume you'll want us to import all of our private keys, right?
Yes, there will be 2 different chains. But the Scrypt chain will prevail.
No it will not. Nobody will stick with this idiocy.its open source
its possible
majority wins
what you feel about is irrelevant
Scrypt is more secure. ASICs cannot 51% Scrypt.
At the moment...
I have just talked to a very large Bitcoin merchant. They said they will upgrade.
Haha - your large merchant mines then do they (if not then why would they want a less secure network)?
Scrypt is more secure. ASICs cannot 51% Scrypt.
WHERE?
I have just talked to a very large Bitcoin merchant. They said they will upgrade.
Haha - your large merchant mines then do they (if not then why would they want a less secure network)?
Scrypt is more secure. ASICs cannot 51% Scrypt.
WHERE?
I have just talked to a very large Bitcoin merchant. They said they will upgrade.
Haha - your large merchant mines then do they (if not then why would they want a less secure network)?
Scrypt is more secure. ASICs cannot 51% Scrypt.
If you do not upgrade to Scrypt, you will be left behind.
No you just stay on the bitcoin-double-sha256 rather than bitcoin-scrypt.
Are you planning to make any changes to how signatures work?
If you don't, then people who spend pre-fork bitcoins on one fork, will effectively be spending them on the other fork too.
For example, if I buy something for 1 scrypt-BTC using a pre-fork coin, then the merchant can submit the exact same transaction to the main chain, and it will be accepted. Vice versa is also possible.
If the scrypt coin was less valuable, then I might end up spending $100 worth of sha256-BTC when I only meant to buy something $1.
An easy option would be to add an offset before signing transactions.
Rather than signing hash(transaction), you could sign hash(transaction + "scrypt-coin"). That would mean that the signatures for the 2 forks would be different.
Jump to: