Bitcoin Core 0.13.1 Released - page 2.

jmayuga

newbie

Activity: 4

Merit: 0

Quote from: dbstmddhks on November 22, 2016, 08:58:27 PM

I made a korean language version post about 0.13.1 version

http://blog.naver.com/monsterbit/220841502398

It's really good to see the improvement of bitcoin blockchain

From wan

Wow! that is fantastic for those people who are comfortable with their languages, it will more easy for them manipulate their coins.

A multilingual program can earn more client Cheesy

I hope that there is also version on the Philippines Cheesy

dbstmddhks

sr. member

Activity: 523

Merit: 250

I made a korean language version post about 0.13.1 version

http://blog.naver.com/monsterbit/220841502398

It's really good to see the improvement of bitcoin blockchain

From wan

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: Icon on November 16, 2016, 02:46:30 PM

"the password" you are referring to is the lock wallet phrase, correct?

Yes.

Quote from: Icon on November 16, 2016, 02:46:30 PM

Also i am assuming you can "import" the .csv back into bitcoin core to access the wallet..?

No, you cannot. The wallet export isn't really for backing up the wallet, rather it is for your own information or if you want to import your Bitcoin Core wallet into another wallet. Right now you cannot restore a Bitcoin Core wallet from the master private key. You need to have the wallet.dat file. The big difference between this and the old versions is that you don't need to backup the wallet.dat every 100 transactions, you only need to do it every time you change the password, which probably isn't very frequent.

Icon

hero member

Activity: 821

Merit: 503

"the password" you are referring to is the lock wallet phrase, correct?

Also i am assuming you can "import" the .csv back into bitcoin core to access the wallet..?

Sorry never messed with any signing/export/print private keys just always truecrypt the wallet.dat and stored

Thanks

Icon

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: Icon on November 16, 2016, 02:32:13 PM

So.. how does one go about exporting the "seed" out of this version, instead of saving each wallet.dat file, my understanding is that we can just save the seed to access all the wallets.dat/addresses from that 1 seed..

Icon

PS

I understand we need to make a new wallet using the 13.x version first..

Bitcoin Core does not support BIP 39 mnemonics yet (what people commonly refer to as seeds). You can however export the wallet in a human readable format (csv I believe) which will contain the master private key. Keep in mind that every time you change the password (add one or change it), the master private key will change.

Icon

hero member

Activity: 821

Merit: 503

So.. how does one go about exporting the "seed" out of this version, instead of saving each wallet.dat file, my understanding is that we can just save the seed to access all the wallets.dat/addresses from that 1 seed..

Icon

PS

I understand we need to make a new wallet using the 13.x version first..

Hyena

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1015

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 10, 2016, 11:29:07 AM

Quote from: Hyena on November 09, 2016, 03:03:50 PM

Quote from: gmaxwell on November 09, 2016, 02:27:01 PM

Quote

It is important to respect the vision of Satoshi Nakamoto because they are the author of Bitcoin.

Says someone who wants to rewrite the network rules in a way radically unlike and incompatible with the state that Bitcoin's creator left it.

Except this fork is a soft fork, so it is backwards compatible by definition. You're advocating a hard fork, which is not backwards compatible. By definition. So you're wrong.

An ugly hack soft fork is no better than a proper and elegant hard fork. So you are wrong.

edit:
What is more, neither of these options will activate without strong consensus. So if we are going to have a consensus either way then let's do a proper and elegant hard fork (has happened before and worked like a charm). There's absolutely nothing bad about a hard fork if we have a strong consensus. Since SegWit won't activate without consensus there is no point to have it in the first place.

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: MadGamer on November 11, 2016, 07:54:05 AM

Quote from: achow101 on November 10, 2016, 10:09:46 AM

Quote from: MadGamer on November 10, 2016, 10:01:51 AM

Hashes are definitely the same but I'm not sure what I did wrong here , I imported all the developers PGP keys theymos posted and while trying to verify this : https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.13.1/SHA256SUMS.asc , I get KEY NOT VALID

Verifies fine for me. Are you sure you imported the key properly? The release key is the second key in Theymos's list of keys.

Yes , I tried with importing the key of that guy alone and with importing them all at once but It's not working . Importing keys works just fine with GPA but verifying doesn't. Are you using the same software as me ?

I believe so. I used GPA on Windows 10 to verify the contents of the file.

MadGamer

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 1031

Quote from: achow101 on November 10, 2016, 10:09:46 AM

Quote from: MadGamer on November 10, 2016, 10:01:51 AM

Hashes are definitely the same but I'm not sure what I did wrong here , I imported all the developers PGP keys theymos posted and while trying to verify this : https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.13.1/SHA256SUMS.asc , I get KEY NOT VALID

Verifies fine for me. Are you sure you imported the key properly? The release key is the second key in Theymos's list of keys.

Yes , I tried with importing the key of that guy alone and with importing them all at once but It's not working . Importing keys works just fine with GPA but verifying doesn't. Are you using the same software as me ?

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Hyena on November 09, 2016, 03:03:50 PM

Quote from: gmaxwell on November 09, 2016, 02:27:01 PM

Quote

It is important to respect the vision of Satoshi Nakamoto because they are the author of Bitcoin.

Says someone who wants to rewrite the network rules in a way radically unlike and incompatible with the state that Bitcoin's creator left it.

Except this fork is a soft fork, so it is backwards compatible by definition. You're advocating a hard fork, which is not backwards compatible. By definition. So you're wrong.

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: MadGamer on November 10, 2016, 10:01:51 AM

Hashes are definitely the same but I'm not sure what I did wrong here , I imported all the developers PGP keys theymos posted and while trying to verify this : https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.13.1/SHA256SUMS.asc , I get KEY NOT VALID

Verifies fine for me. Are you sure you imported the key properly? The release key is the second key in Theymos's list of keys.

MadGamer

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 1031

Quote from: achow101 on November 10, 2016, 09:40:32 AM

Quote from: MadGamer on November 10, 2016, 09:35:34 AM

Quote from: (No subject) on November 10, 2016, 06:57:55 AM

I just download Bitcoin Core 0.13.1 setup file from link in forum header, before install I checked with

https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/a7d1d25bbc46b4f0fe333f7d3742c22defdba8db9ffd6056770e104085d24709/analysis/

is it safe to install?

I just scanned my setup file too which I downloaded when this version first got released from Bitcoin.org and I'm having the results as you so I assume It's a false positive and there is nothing be worried about.

Double check the hashes and verify the binaries by following https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/verifying-bitcoin-core-1588906. If it all checks out, then it is a false positive.

Hashes are definitely the same but I'm not sure what I did wrong here , I imported all the developers PGP keys theymos posted and while trying to verify this : https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.13.1/SHA256SUMS.asc , I get KEY NOT VALID

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: MadGamer on November 10, 2016, 09:35:34 AM

Quote from: (No subject) on November 10, 2016, 06:57:55 AM

I just download Bitcoin Core 0.13.1 setup file from link in forum header, before install I checked with

https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/a7d1d25bbc46b4f0fe333f7d3742c22defdba8db9ffd6056770e104085d24709/analysis/

is it safe to install?

I just scanned my setup file too which I downloaded when this version first got released from Bitcoin.org and I'm having the results as you so I assume It's a false positive and there is nothing be worried about.

Double check the hashes and verify the binaries by following https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/verifying-bitcoin-core-1588906. If it all checks out, then it is a false positive.

MadGamer

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 1031

Quote from: (No subject) on November 10, 2016, 06:57:55 AM

I just download Bitcoin Core 0.13.1 setup file from link in forum header, before install I checked with

https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/a7d1d25bbc46b4f0fe333f7d3742c22defdba8db9ffd6056770e104085d24709/analysis/

is it safe to install?

I just scanned my setup file too which I downloaded when this version first got released from Bitcoin.org and I'm having the results as you so I assume It's a false positive and there is nothing be worried about.

(No subject)

member

Activity: 65

Merit: 10

I just download Bitcoin Core 0.13.1 setup file from link in forum header, before install I checked with

https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/a7d1d25bbc46b4f0fe333f7d3742c22defdba8db9ffd6056770e104085d24709/analysis/

is it safe to install?

Hyena

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1015

Quote from: gmaxwell on November 09, 2016, 02:27:01 PM

Quote from: Hyena on November 08, 2016, 06:27:09 PM

Network speed cap is the maximum block size that can travel through the network fast enough so that it would not be orphaned. Miners are never going to mine blocks that are so large that they will be orphaned (another miner mining a much smaller block will get to propagate it faster,

If any any point miners find that blocks are being orphaned because they are too slow to propagate then the rational, natural, and previously observed behavior is that miners will simply centralize since doing so eliminates that cost. Because the effect of orphaning can be made arbitrarily small (by centralization or other means), your proposed effect cannot constitute a long term effective control on resource utilization.

Oh will they really? You're from the future or something? So you are proposing one form of centralization as a solution to the hypothetical other? Well if that's the choice then I'd still go to the direction of empowering the full nodes and taking power away from the development team of a particular branch of the bitcoin software. We have seen mining centralization in past and it was solved. What gives you the fantasy of it not getting solved in the future? That's right. You've got nothing.

Quote from: gmaxwell on November 09, 2016, 02:27:01 PM

Quote

It is important to respect the vision of Satoshi Nakamoto because they are the author of Bitcoin.

Says someone who wants to rewrite the network rules in a way radically unlike and incompatible with the state that Bitcoin's creator left it.

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4284

Merit: 8808

Quote from: Jake-R on November 09, 2016, 02:28:11 PM

How are maxconnections=__ controlled now? Is it now n-1?

In my bitcoin.conf file I can set maxconnections=10 but only nine other clients will connect. If I set maxconnections=11 then only ten other clients will connect. Is this a bug, or feature?

An extra connection is reserved for short lived 'feeler' connections which the node uses to explore the network.

Jake-R

full member

Activity: 142

Merit: 100

How are maxconnections=__ controlled now? Is it now n-1?

In my bitcoin.conf file I can set maxconnections=10 but only nine other clients will connect. If I set maxconnections=11 then only ten other clients will connect. Is this a bug, or feature?

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4284

Merit: 8808

Quote from: Hyena on November 08, 2016, 06:27:09 PM

Network speed cap is the maximum block size that can travel through the network fast enough so that it would not be orphaned. Miners are never going to mine blocks that are so large that they will be orphaned (another miner mining a much smaller block will get to propagate it faster,

If any any point miners find that blocks are being orphaned because they are too slow to propagate then the rational, natural, and previously observed behavior is that miners will simply centralize since doing so eliminates that cost. Because the effect of orphaning can be made arbitrarily small (by centralization or other means), your proposed effect cannot constitute a long term effective control on resource utilization.

Quote

It is important to respect the vision of Satoshi Nakamoto because they are the author of Bitcoin.

Says someone who wants to rewrite the network rules in a way radically unlike and incompatible with the state that Bitcoin's creator left it.

Hyena

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1015

Quote from: Lauda on November 09, 2016, 03:28:20 AM

Quote from: Hyena on November 09, 2016, 03:20:40 AM

Quote from: Lauda on November 08, 2016, 06:31:10 PM

...

What you just said is simply false and you keep repeating it. I guess this argument leads nowhere.

A clear example of argumentum ad lapidem. You have no valid points to defend an invalid stance, hence the dismissal.

I don't really care. I'm expressing my opinion for the sake of people who can actually do their own thinking. You clearly cannot (perhaps because you are being paid to lie?) SegWit will eventually lose just like Killary Clinton did. People are waking up to the lies. BTW, you seem to be fanatically holding on to the assumption that I support BU so much. I don't. I don't think BU should even get the majority of nodes because that will lead to more centralization again just like it is the case with Core. Bitcoin Unlimited is currently the best alternative simply because it includes the logic to deal with competing chains. If Core enabled options for the users to disable SegWit on their node and to define my own maximum block size then I would consider using Core. If you oppose decentralization which you clearly do then you do not belong to the Bitcoin community. Why are you here then? Ethereum or Ripple would suit much better to you. Have you heard of them?

Topic: Bitcoin Core 0.13.1 Released - page 2. (Read 13211 times)