Just be patient... ALOT!
Topic: CoinWallet.eu Stress Test Cancelled + Bitcoin Giveaway - page 2. (Read 98836 times)
Yes, importing to Core is a good idea!
Just be patient... ALOT!
Just be patient... ALOT!
how i use this keys? 
Just import them into your blockchain wallet or bitcoin core. BTW, they are all empty now.
how i use this keys?
I guess the reason is that large transactions are more likely to conflict with something in the mempool and are therefore much harder to push to the miners, correct?
Yes. Smaller txs have more overhead, but this is still more efficient than most of the sweeper spam that creates utxos and uses big sigs. Ideally the miners would OP_RETURN it themselves in big txs but it seems they were too lazy.
Quote
Does this mean that the keys for the remaining 172 BTC will be published later?
My guess is that coinwallet overestimated the impact of the "giveaway", so gave up. The problem is, of course, that one can only construct low-fee txs with dust inputs, which has no real impact on the network (apart from artificially inflating the average blocksize). Normal-fee traffic was unaffected.
I guess coinwallet will consolidate the remaining dust outputs themselves at some point since there is no real point in giving it away. But if they publish more keys then our bots are ready...
I got less than half a bitcoin, but I spent a lot of time writing scripts and babysitting bitcoin nodes, and adjusting size/fee ratios. It was fun however.
28 BTC from inputs or outputs? I mean, 28 BTC including fees?
28 BTC is what was sent to the published addresses and what was subsequently sweeped from them. So it includes the fees that the sweeping transactions payed. It doesn't include the fee that coinwallet.eu payed to produce the dust output. This fee could be another 20-40 BTC; I'm too lazy to write a program to count it. What people trying to collect the dust received was probably in the range of 5-7 BTC, but that is a wild guess.
Yep, almost done. It's got a lot harder to double spend over the last few hours as the mempools become more homogeneous. My score is a big fat 0BTC -- which was the plan all along.
We did manage to pump the daily txs to an all time record: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions
Over at r/bitcoin they are trying to figure out what it going on.
Interestingly, coinwallet only released a fraction of their keys (mostly from the early Sept spam attack). They have not released the most keys from the late July/early Aug spam attack. The latter looks to be about 5-6x bigger.
We did manage to pump the daily txs to an all time record: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions
Over at r/bitcoin they are trying to figure out what it going on.
Interestingly, coinwallet only released a fraction of their keys (mostly from the early Sept spam attack). They have not released the most keys from the late July/early Aug spam attack. The latter looks to be about 5-6x bigger.
Total received: 28.15759741 BTC on 791 addresses (unless I have a bug in my quick 'n dirty counting script). Does this mean that the keys for the remaining 172 BTC will be published later?
28 BTC from inputs or outputs? I mean, 28 BTC including fees?
For a few bitcents I would really question if it is worth it. What percentage of the inputs total are these bitcents? If most of the value is going in fees you are basically just donating your time and effort to miners.
Welp, it really wasn't worth to even try transferring those coins manually. The few that knew how to handle this in a more knowledgeable manner might have received decent sums of coins but this 'giveaway' was definitely not easily accessible or worth it.
Yep, almost done. It's got a lot harder to double spend over the last few hours as the mempools become more homogeneous. My score is a big fat 0BTC -- which was the plan all along.
We did manage to pump the daily txs to an all time record: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions
Over at r/bitcoin they are trying to figure out what it going on.
Interestingly, coinwallet only released a fraction of their keys (mostly from the early Sept spam attack). They have not released the most keys from the late July/early Aug spam attack. The latter looks to be about 5-6x bigger.
We did manage to pump the daily txs to an all time record: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions
Over at r/bitcoin they are trying to figure out what it going on.
Interestingly, coinwallet only released a fraction of their keys (mostly from the early Sept spam attack). They have not released the most keys from the late July/early Aug spam attack. The latter looks to be about 5-6x bigger.
According to my script you were successful in cleaning the last dust. 0 UTXO left (my script only considers confirmed transactions).
Why did you do it in so many transactions? It would save a few bytes to use larger transactions and give a better fee per byte ratio. I guess the reason is that large transactions are more likely to conflict with something in the mempool and are therefore much harder to push to the miners, correct?
Total received: 28.15759741 BTC on 791 addresses (unless I have a bug in my quick 'n dirty counting script). Does this mean that the keys for the remaining 172 BTC will be published later?
PS: Another effect of these transaction is that my R-value cracker runs much much slower now. Almost 2.5 Million duplicated R-values
For a few bitcents I would really question if it is worth it. What percentage of the inputs total are these bitcents? If most of the value is going in fees you are basically just donating your time and effort to miners.
awesome basil00!
I got a few bitcents, it was fun. maybe their plan is to get everybody's code up and running, so they can drop the "bomb" more effectively and all at once.
I got a few bitcents, it was fun. maybe their plan is to get everybody's code up and running, so they can drop the "bomb" more effectively and all at once.
Yep, almost done. It's got a lot harder to double spend over the last few hours as the mempools become more homogeneous. My score is a big fat 0BTC -- which was the plan all along.
We did manage to pump the daily txs to an all time record: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions
Over at r/bitcoin they are trying to figure out what it going on.
Interestingly, coinwallet only released a fraction of their keys (mostly from the early Sept spam attack). They have not released the most keys from the late July/early Aug spam attack. The latter looks to be about 5-6x bigger.
We did manage to pump the daily txs to an all time record: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions
Over at r/bitcoin they are trying to figure out what it going on.
Interestingly, coinwallet only released a fraction of their keys (mostly from the early Sept spam attack). They have not released the most keys from the late July/early Aug spam attack. The latter looks to be about 5-6x bigger.
Almost all outputs were spent!
Would be nice if someone made a script so we can see who "won" the most from the giveaway.
Seems like someone is preparing a new stress test: https://blockchain.info/address/17ykSdRM4U625qPXp1LcqK5fKFSfxMenUa
Would be nice if someone made a script so we can see who "won" the most from the giveaway.
Seems like someone is preparing a new stress test: https://blockchain.info/address/17ykSdRM4U625qPXp1LcqK5fKFSfxMenUa
Just curious why bc.i act differently.
May be tradeblock counts incorrect this ton of transactions.Quote
Haha no, I didnt think that was a fair game. But I am glad to have a good result in competition 
The result (for me) is money on bank account or even at home as cash.Or even goods bought with these money.
Not a bitcoins count on screen of my computer.
So, we are too far from the finish of this race.
Check-pointing the real life is useless.
@amaclin: bc.i reports a wrong confirmed balance for your "1aa5..." address
Do you know why? A possible bug?
I do not care. Why do you care?Do you know why? A possible bug?
Just curious why bc.i act differently.
Quote
P.S. If we think this as a "game" , is it correct remove "1aaf64..." from your score, right? It was without competition
Have I said that this is fair game? Welcome to real world., is it correct remove "1aaf64..." from your score, right? It was without competition Haha no, I didnt think that was a fair game. But I am glad to have a good result in competition
@amaclin: bc.i reports a wrong confirmed balance for your "1aa5..." address
Do you know why? A possible bug?
I do not care. Why do you care?Do you know why? A possible bug?
Quote
P.S. If we think this as a "game" , is it correct remove "1aaf64..." from your score, right? It was without competition
Have I said that this is fair game? Welcome to real world. , is it correct remove "1aaf64..." from your score, right? It was without competition Everyone here is just a troll. The guy saying he got 4 btc hasn't shown a speck of proof, meanwhile I post I got a little BTC and he lambasts me and someone attacks me. I don't think any of you can program for shit and are just trying to discourage me.
https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/address/1aa5cmqmvQq8YQTEqcTmW7dfBNuFwgdCD Confirmed Balance 0.77936884
https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/address/1aamWKicYga3AN8UgywedHzEG12KbUUJJ Confirmed Balance 0.34194780
https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/address/1aaf64VJGMuYuRBMmM9y2s2pPADFpuqDE Confirmed Balance 2.87336933
https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/address/1aajpztNecNzGBDjJhGfkrsUJFgeyhBgY Confirmed Balance 0.65323966
@amaclin: bc.i reports a wrong confirmed balance for your "1aa5..." address https://blockchain.info/it/address/1aa5cmqmvQq8YQTEqcTmW7dfBNuFwgdCD .
Do you know why? A possible bug?
P.S. If we think this as a "game"
, is it correct to remove "1aaf64..." from your score, right? It was without competition You just don't want to admit that you could've had 10X more BTC, since it is a huge loss and a tremendous error. Congrats on the 4 btc I guess, unfortunate you let blockchain.info decide for you on what a valid transaction is.
Oh, man. I feel myself bad when I think about how many btc can be in my wallet if...Ask @johoe about bc.i incident in december '14
You could've had 50 BTC
No. I couldn't. I could have a little bit more if i do not share my knowledge about the shortest signature here in this topic.
basil00 got that knowledge
you haven't
amaclin, how can I sign the outputs with p2pk?
that indeed takes a lot less space
i checked documentation on bitcoin and found no option to do it
that indeed takes a lot less space
i checked documentation on bitcoin and found no option to do it
I do not know how to answer your question.
This is the same signing algorithm as for p2pkh
but the public key already in stack by evaluating scriptpubkey
so i preform the same actions and at last put only signature.
here is a snippet of my code
const QByteArray Transaction::rawTransaction ( const UxToList& unspent, const int i, const quint64 fee )
{
EvalScript escr ( unspent.at ( i ).getScript ( ) );
MyByteArray ret; ret.reserve ( 1024 );
QByteArray signature;
QByteArray pubkey;
Finder& db ( Bitcoin::getFinder ( ) );
switch ( escr.evaluateOutput ( ) )
{
/*0*/case EVAL_UNKNOWN:
xassert ( false );
break;
/*1*/case EVAL_HASH160:
{
db.sign ( escr.getAddress ( ), rawData ( unspent, i, fee ), signature, pubkey );
ret.putPrefixed ( signature ).putPrefixed ( pubkey );
} break;
/*2*/case EVAL_PUBKEY:
{
db.sign ( MyKey20::calc ( escr.getValue ( 0 ) ), rawData ( unspent, i, fee ), signature, pubkey );
ret.putPrefixed ( signature );
} break;
Jump to: