[DEAD] DeepBit.net PPS+Prop,instant payouts, we pay for INVALID BLOCKS too - page 90.

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3583

Merit: 1094

Think for yourself

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: os2sam on February 26, 2012, 04:14:27 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Multi factor authentication is more secure than single factor authentication. True or false?

Private Key + Encrypted Wallet = Two

At least that is what I learnt when I was is scrool.
Sam

If I have the password to your encrypted wallet, I have your private keys as well. Nice try though.

Ok, I'll give you that.

Quote from: ?? on ??

I honestly think you are being intentionally obtuse. And now rude as well.

Obtuse? I may be.

Rude? No I'm just trying to get you all to admit that there is no inherent deficiency in the Bitcoin technology that requires this change. Or to prove that there is.

Sam

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3583

Merit: 1094

Think for yourself

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: os2sam on February 26, 2012, 03:57:44 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Your argument boils down to: Bitcoin is secure enough.

Mine boils down to: let's have some options to make it even more secure.

I don't know if BIP16 is the right answer, but I sure wish I had accessible multi-sig functionality in the official client.

My argument is not "Bitcoin is secure enough". I don't know that it is.

But the onus is on you guys to prove that "multi-sig" is necessary not on me to prove that it isn't. The arguments for doing so can only be described as behavioral. Making changes to overcome an individuals behavior is a no win situation.
Sam

Multi factor authentication is more secure than single factor authentication. True or false?

It really seems like you are opposed to providing people with better tools to secure their wallets.

I don't need to behave in any fashion, other than connecting my bitcoin client to the internet, to risk losing my wallet.

Edit: Let's not forget that multi-sig has uses other than security as well.

I oppose making changes, which will effect everyone, to solve problems, which effect a few usually irresponsible, that have already been solved. At least without a valid reason for doing so.
Sam

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3583

Merit: 1094

Think for yourself

Quote from: ?? on ??

Multi factor authentication is more secure than single factor authentication. True or false?

Private Key + Encrypted Wallet = Two

At least that is what I learnt when I was is scrool.
Sam

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: os2sam on February 26, 2012, 03:57:44 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Your argument boils down to: Bitcoin is secure enough.

Mine boils down to: let's have some options to make it even more secure.

I don't know if BIP16 is the right answer, but I sure wish I had accessible multi-sig functionality in the official client.

My argument is not "Bitcoin is secure enough". I don't know that it is.

But the onus is on you guys to prove that "multi-sig" is necessary not on me to prove that it isn't. The arguments for doing so can only be described as behavioral. Making changes to overcome an individuals behavior is a no win situation.
Sam

Some might say that malware developers are afraid of the change, and are attempting to delay it as long as possible by spreading FUD, and causing delays. Who are we to believe then?

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3583

Merit: 1094

Think for yourself

Quote from: ?? on ??

Your argument boils down to: Bitcoin is secure enough.

Mine boils down to: let's have some options to make it even more secure.

I don't know if BIP16 is the right answer, but I sure wish I had accessible multi-sig functionality in the official client.

My argument is not "Bitcoin is secure enough". I don't know that it is.

But the onus is on you guys to prove that "multi-sig" is necessary not on me to prove that it isn't. The arguments for doing so can only be described as behavioral. Making changes to overcome an individuals behavior is a no win situation.
Sam

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3583

Merit: 1094

Think for yourself

Quote from: ?? on ??

to vote the same as deepbit, all you have to do is run the stock bitcoin client.

How does running my stock bitcoin client increase the proof of work effort? I guess I'm a little ignorant on this point?
Sam

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3583

Merit: 1094

Think for yourself

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: os2sam on February 20, 2012, 12:03:37 AM

Why implement it at all? Nobody has made a real argument which proves the need. So, again, why?

Without getting into an argument over which multi-sig to implement, or even whether to add the current multi-sig functionality to the client so normal people can use it, there is the obvious reason that I already gave you.

More security. Simple.

Multi-sig as a security feature will provide more security than password encrypted wallets alone. Just because you don't see the need doesn't mean that need doesn't exist.

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on January 13, 2012, 05:49:25 PM

I want to stop playing whack-a-mole with wallet stealing viruses and trojans, and I think requiring more than one private key to sign away your bitcoins is the critical feature needed to do that. Keep one set of keys on your computer, another set of keys on your cell phone, teach each to talk to the other before sending out bitcoins and you're safe (as long as a virus or trojan doesn't infect BOTH your cell phone and your computer at the same time).

Full post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.690402

Making changes to offset peoples irresponsibility, ignorance, laziness or other undesirable behavior is a loosing battle and impinges on that individuals freedom as well as impacts the Bitcoin network in ways that can't be foreseen. In the future PC's and the malware associated with them may be completely obsolete for monetary transactions. Storing on private keys on a cell phone is just crazy as smart phones and the networks they reside CANNOT be secured.
Sam

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3583

Merit: 1094

Think for yourself

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: os2sam on February 25, 2012, 09:31:23 PM

Quote from: Technomage on February 23, 2012, 06:25:08 PM

Going forward with P2SH is a significant step forward for the development of Bitcoin, we can't let one man stall it.

I'm fairly certain there is more than one man mining on Deepbit.

If you want to get technical, one man is mining, the rest are selling him shares for a reduced rate in exchange for variance reduction. Wink

OK get technical, if that's what you want to call it.

The point is that Deepbit is the only pool I can go to protest this lunacy. Nobody can/will articulate what the deficiency in the Bitcoin technology is that requires a change. Until someone can make the case that the Bitcoin network/technology has a vulnerability which requires change, I am against it!

Meanwhile portions of the community are trying to strong arm Deepbit into taking away of the only effective voice of dissension I have available. Not vary fair if you ask me. Other pools have said they would setup servers to not vote for the change and I have posted my vote for that but it hasn't come to fruition, and I rather doubt that it will.
Sam

Fanatic

newbie

Activity: 210

Merit: 0

4Th/s this evening... nice job!

http://s1.ipicture.ru/uploads/20120226/uyg6UCzJ.bmp

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3583

Merit: 1094

Think for yourself

Quote from: Technomage on February 23, 2012, 06:25:08 PM

Going forward with P2SH is a significant step forward for the development of Bitcoin, we can't let one man stall it.

I'm fairly certain there is more than one man mining on Deepbit.

cmg5461

sr. member

Activity: 369

Merit: 250

Quote from: Fiyasko on February 24, 2012, 03:25:55 PM

Gah Deepbit whats wrong with you?

Code:

 cgminer version 2.1.2 - Started: [2012-02-22 10:49:29]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):331.2 (avg):609.3 Mh/s | Q:28505  A:25074  R:64  HW:0  E:88%  U:8.43/m
 TQ: 1  ST: 0  SS: 51  DW: 1363  NB: 332  LW: 0  GF: 112  RF: 149
 Connected to http://pit.deepbit.net:8332 with LP as user ___________
 Block: 000001b45780cb1cb1d5f66ee975187f...  Started: [12:20:59]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 GPU 0:  64.0C  40%    | 314.3/304.2Mh/s | A:12581 R:32 HW:0 U:  4.23/m I: 3
 GPU 1:  65.0C  40%    | 439.1/305.2Mh/s | A:12493 R:32 HW:0 U:  4.20/m I: 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[2012-02-24 12:24:18] Pool 0 not providing work fast enough
[2012-02-24 12:24:53] Pool 0 communication resumed, submitting work
[2012-02-24 12:24:53] Accepted 00000000.4e68a616.2f23a60a GPU 1 thread 1
[2012-02-24 12:24:53] Accepted 00000000.063b83c7.84ad558f GPU 0 thread 2
[2012-02-24 12:24:53] Accepted 00000000.c7960201.c8289535 GPU 0 thread 0
[2012-02-24 12:24:54] Accepted 00000000.6b58e6e8.b8ff2c1d GPU 1 thread 1
[2012-02-24 12:24:56] Pool 0 communication failure, caching submissions
[2012-02-24 12:24:57] Pool 0 communication resumed, submitting work
[2012-02-24 12:24:57] Accepted 00000000.7348486d.dd80b66c GPU 0 thread 2
[2012-02-24 12:25:07] Pool 0 not providing work fast enough
[2012-02-24 12:25:19] Pool 0 http://pit.deepbit.net:8332 not responding!
[2012-02-24 12:25:19] Pool 0 communication failure, caching submissions

Edit: It was prolly my fault

I'm having the same problems. I'm at like.. 25% rejection rate on my rig.

Fiyasko

legendary

Activity: 1428

Merit: 1001

Okey Dokey Lokey

Gah Deepbit whats wrong with you?

Code:

 cgminer version 2.1.2 - Started: [2012-02-22 10:49:29]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (5s):331.2 (avg):609.3 Mh/s | Q:28505  A:25074  R:64  HW:0  E:88%  U:8.43/m
 TQ: 1  ST: 0  SS: 51  DW: 1363  NB: 332  LW: 0  GF: 112  RF: 149
 Connected to http://pit.deepbit.net:8332 with LP as user ___________
 Block: 000001b45780cb1cb1d5f66ee975187f...  Started: [12:20:59]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 GPU 0:  64.0C  40%    | 314.3/304.2Mh/s | A:12581 R:32 HW:0 U:  4.23/m I: 3
 GPU 1:  65.0C  40%    | 439.1/305.2Mh/s | A:12493 R:32 HW:0 U:  4.20/m I: 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[2012-02-24 12:24:18] Pool 0 not providing work fast enough
[2012-02-24 12:24:53] Pool 0 communication resumed, submitting work
[2012-02-24 12:24:53] Accepted 00000000.4e68a616.2f23a60a GPU 1 thread 1
[2012-02-24 12:24:53] Accepted 00000000.063b83c7.84ad558f GPU 0 thread 2
[2012-02-24 12:24:53] Accepted 00000000.c7960201.c8289535 GPU 0 thread 0
[2012-02-24 12:24:54] Accepted 00000000.6b58e6e8.b8ff2c1d GPU 1 thread 1
[2012-02-24 12:24:56] Pool 0 communication failure, caching submissions
[2012-02-24 12:24:57] Pool 0 communication resumed, submitting work
[2012-02-24 12:24:57] Accepted 00000000.7348486d.dd80b66c GPU 0 thread 2
[2012-02-24 12:25:07] Pool 0 not providing work fast enough
[2012-02-24 12:25:19] Pool 0 http://pit.deepbit.net:8332 not responding!
[2012-02-24 12:25:19] Pool 0 communication failure, caching submissions

Edit: It was prolly my fault

Graet

vip

Activity: 980

Merit: 1001

Quote from: eleuthria on February 23, 2012, 10:30:27 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Hi, why aren't all pools implementing real accounts (payout AND payin) so that they can act like banks with mobile clients that use QR code scanning and transfer money with a click on your smartphone?

Most pool owners would prefer you get your coins off their servers rather than hold them for you. You see probably once a month or more some pool/exchange getting "hacked" and losing coins. While I don't believe any major pools (Slush, Deepbit, BTCGuild, Eligius, ArsBitcoin, EMC) has had ever had their wallet hacked [which is why I still suspect most/all of the "hacked" pools are just thieves], that doesn't mean it can't happen. Being a major pool comes with the expectation that if something goes wrong, the pool op will fix it out of their own pocket.

mm yer, or they havent dislosed they have been comprominsed.... It is easy to suspect with no investagation or knowledge....like [which is why I still suspect most/all of the major pools have at some time been hacked]
-see what i did there? - there is enough fud thrown round the forums, poolops should set an example not make it worse...

When Ozcoin was hacked recently I was prepared to cover any losses, but due to some good people in the community we were helped through this.
Random accusations are random, lets try to keep it to facts )
Graeme

finway

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

[Tycho]: BIP16 is waiting for you.

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Not to mention the p2sh support graph was higher a few days ago than it is currenty, BTC Guild had some technical issues and produced less than half as many blocks as normal in the past two days [not counting today].

Technomage

legendary

Activity: 2184

Merit: 1056

Affordable Physical Bitcoins - Denarium.com

Quote from: rjk on February 23, 2012, 06:28:10 PM

Would you mind linking us to some nice graphs and/or charts to prove that more than 50% of the network already is showing their support?

Approximately 36% of the network is currently voting for P2SH. Deepbit has 34% of the network which means that excluding Deepbit there is a 54.54% support for P2SH.

That is the only sane way of calculating it, asking for over 50% of total hashing power without Deepbit's support is insane and I see little chance of any vote going through in my lifetime if that is required. I assume Tycho didn't mean that when he talked about majority support.

True majority support is behind P2SH, I seriously doubt that people mine at Deepbit because they protest to P2SH. Cheesy

http://blockchain.info/p2sh
http://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=4days

rjk

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

1ngldh

Quote from: Technomage on February 23, 2012, 06:25:08 PM

Deepbit operator Tycho has said that he will follow the majority in the P2SH debate. The majority has spoken, over 50% of the hashing power (Deepbit excluded) is supporting BIP 16. Everyone is waiting for his move right now. What is going on?

Unless he co-operates soon, there should be a further awareness campaign regarding the issue at hand, directed at Deepbit users. Going forward with P2SH is a significant step forward for the development of Bitcoin, we can't let one man stall it.

I think it was a smart move from Tycho to not be proactive on this issue but I hope that he comes to his senses now and does the right thing. The other pools have spoken.

Would you mind linking us to some nice graphs and/or charts to prove that more than 50% of the network already is showing their support?

Technomage

legendary

Activity: 2184

Merit: 1056

Affordable Physical Bitcoins - Denarium.com

Deepbit operator Tycho has said that he will follow the majority in the P2SH debate. The majority has spoken, over 50% of the hashing power (Deepbit excluded) is supporting BIP 16. Everyone is waiting for his move right now. What is going on?

Unless he co-operates soon, there should be a further awareness campaign regarding the issue at hand, directed at Deepbit users. Going forward with P2SH is a significant step forward for the development of Bitcoin, we can't let one man stall it.

I think it was a smart move from Tycho to not be proactive on this issue but I hope that he comes to his senses now and does the right thing. The other pools have spoken.

pirateat40

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

"Yes I am a pirate, 200 years too late."

Quote from: eleuthria on February 23, 2012, 10:30:27 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Hi, why aren't all pools implementing real accounts (payout AND payin) so that they can act like banks with mobile clients that use QR code scanning and transfer money with a click on your smartphone?

Most pool owners would prefer you get your coins off their servers rather than hold them for you. You see probably once a month or more some pool/exchange getting "hacked" and losing coins. While I don't believe any major pools (Slush, Deepbit, BTCGuild, Eligius, ArsBitcoin, EMC) has had ever had their wallet hacked [which is why I still suspect most/all of the "hacked" pools are just thieves], that doesn't mean it can't happen. Being a major pool comes with the expectation that if something goes wrong, the pool op will fix it out of their own pocket.

You mean Graet is a scammer? Huh

I'm telling mom!!!

jk

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Quote from: ?? on ??

Hi, why aren't all pools implementing real accounts (payout AND payin) so that they can act like banks with mobile clients that use QR code scanning and transfer money with a click on your smartphone?

Most pool owners would prefer you get your coins off their servers rather than hold them for you. You see probably once a month or more some pool/exchange getting "hacked" and losing coins. While I don't believe any major pools (Slush, Deepbit, BTCGuild, Eligius, ArsBitcoin, EMC) has had ever had their wallet hacked [which is why I still suspect most/all of the "hacked" pools are just thieves], that doesn't mean it can't happen. Being a major pool comes with the expectation that if something goes wrong, the pool op will fix it out of their own pocket.

Topic: [DEAD] DeepBit.net PPS+Prop,instant payouts, we pay for INVALID BLOCKS too - page 90. (Read 1601330 times)