Hey Tonych,
I have recieved Byte from first round, but I have send it, they are not in this address anymore.
I don't want to send the Bytes back to this linked address, since it's been used to send a tx.
Or can addresses be reused in byteball?
Thanks
Topic: Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments - page 905. (Read 1234271 times)
February 07, 2017, 06:21:54 AM
February 07, 2017, 06:00:42 AM
The moon is almost full, and a little more than 3 days left before the 2nd round. Please don't forget to move your bitcoins and bytes to the linked addresses before the Full Moon. Chat with the transition bot to check these addresses and their balances.
The rules of the 3rd round stay exactly the same as in the 2nd round. The 3rd round is scheduled for the Full Moon of March.
The rules of the 3rd round stay exactly the same as in the 2nd round. The 3rd round is scheduled for the Full Moon of March.
February 07, 2017, 05:54:29 AM
Last month someone was kind enough to give a step by step for using the blockchain.info wallet to sync with the byteball issuance. Could someone again please outline the step by step?
Thanks
Thanks
settings > address > find the address you want to sign a message > click "more options" in the side of the address > put your message
February 07, 2017, 04:47:09 AM
if i got it right there is current total supply of 100 000 Gb.
how come it turns into ammount (116 250 Gb) that exceed this given (100 000 Gb) maximum?
how come it turns into ammount (116 250 Gb) that exceed this given (100 000 Gb) maximum?
That's the number of bytes in circulation which is 10% of the total supply.
am i rigth that at some moment (when will it come?) total supply will rise to 1 000 000 Gb (10^15 bytes).
Each round gives away a little amount until the total supply is distributed. The when depends on the rules and on the linked BTC amount. For the time being expect a handful of years before all the bytes are distributed.
good strategy cause such way of distribution prevents price dumping.
got it. thanks.
February 07, 2017, 04:43:26 AM
if i got it right there is current total supply of 100 000 Gb.
how come it turns into ammount (116 250 Gb) that exceed this given (100 000 Gb) maximum?
how come it turns into ammount (116 250 Gb) that exceed this given (100 000 Gb) maximum?
That's the number of bytes in circulation which is 10% of the total supply.
am i rigth that at some moment (when will it come?) total supply will rise to 1 000 000 Gb (10^15 bytes).
Each round gives away a little amount until the total supply is distributed. The when depends on the rules and on the linked BTC amount. For the time being expect a handful of years before all the bytes are distributed.
February 07, 2017, 04:17:51 AM
I got a really, really stupid question regarding the 12 witnesses:
Are we necessarily talking about one individual per witness? Or could there be the possibility of "witness pools", as in a group of people cooperating to "form" a single witness? If yes, I can see this as a community approach to decide whether or not they think 12 individuals suffice.
Just a thought.
Are we necessarily talking about one individual per witness? Or could there be the possibility of "witness pools", as in a group of people cooperating to "form" a single witness? If yes, I can see this as a community approach to decide whether or not they think 12 individuals suffice.
Just a thought.
It is possible that there is a group behind a witness.
February 07, 2017, 03:45:31 AM
here a summery about the connections of the OSX Wallet.
a part of the OSX app (nwjs) connects to several addresses. dev will fix this and a workaround is already posted.
here the connections i found:
SatoNatomato helps with this:
tonych will fix it:
a part of the OSX app (nwjs) connects to several addresses. dev will fix this and a workaround is already posted.
here the connections i found:
Quote
wants to connect to redirector.gvt1.com on TCP port 443 (https)
IP Address 172.217.22.174
Reverse DNS Name arn09s11-in-f174.1e100.net
IP Address 172.217.22.174
Reverse DNS Name arn09s11-in-f174.1e100.net
Quote
wants to connect to i.ytimg.com on TCP port 443 (https)
IP Address 172.217.22.174
Reverse DNS Name arn09s11-in-f14.1e100.net
Established by /Applications/Byteball.app/Contents/MacOS/nwjs
Process ID 3668
IP Address 172.217.22.174
Reverse DNS Name arn09s11-in-f14.1e100.net
Established by /Applications/Byteball.app/Contents/MacOS/nwjs
Process ID 3668
SatoNatomato helps with this:
Quote
Seems to be nwjs, the component used by Byteball. Maybe it means NodeWebKit.js and is the browser-bundled up.
Google is known for adding a bunch of shit in every source-code they touch to "resolve" something on their servers. This could be information leakage, especially when using it over Tor - who knows what it sends to Google even if it is the hostname and datetime its too much.
@tonych, maybe see if there is a default option which has to be turned off when importing/using nwjs?
edit: https://github.com/nwjs/nw.js/issues/5343 just one issue, expect 100 more "accidents" by google. edit2: if using the chromiu-args proxy workaround, make it something else than 127.0.0.1, like 127.6.6.6 to avoid more other problems.
Google is known for adding a bunch of shit in every source-code they touch to "resolve" something on their servers. This could be information leakage, especially when using it over Tor - who knows what it sends to Google even if it is the hostname and datetime its too much.
@tonych, maybe see if there is a default option which has to be turned off when importing/using nwjs?
edit: https://github.com/nwjs/nw.js/issues/5343 just one issue, expect 100 more "accidents" by google. edit2: if using the chromiu-args proxy workaround, make it something else than 127.0.0.1, like 127.6.6.6 to avoid more other problems.
tonych will fix it:
Quote
Thanks for reporting. As other people said here and in a few github issues, it is some (supposedly dead) code in nwjs making connections to google properties. These connections will be blocked in the next release. If you want to block them now, edit your package.json by adding this proxy setting:
https://github.com/byteball/byteball/commit/dfdd00808e3ac8f3268e7e346c2009bb403260f5
The location of package.json on Mac is /Applications/Byteball.app/Contents/Resources/app.nw/package.json.
https://github.com/byteball/byteball/commit/dfdd00808e3ac8f3268e7e346c2009bb403260f5
The location of package.json on Mac is /Applications/Byteball.app/Contents/Resources/app.nw/package.json.
February 07, 2017, 03:37:50 AM
an other connection. this one if funny a tiny picture.
i.ytimg.com
i will no stop reporting. because i think it is clear that nwjs thing is the reason. dev will know what to do.
i.ytimg.com
Quote
wants to connect to i.ytimg.com on TCP port 443 (https)
IP Address 172.217.22.174
Reverse DNS Name arn09s11-in-f14.1e100.net
Established by /Applications/Byteball.app/Contents/MacOS/nwjs
Process ID 3668
something googelish according the IP
IP Address 172.217.22.174
Reverse DNS Name arn09s11-in-f14.1e100.net
Established by /Applications/Byteball.app/Contents/MacOS/nwjs
Process ID 3668
something googelish according the IP
i will no stop reporting. because i think it is clear that nwjs thing is the reason. dev will know what to do.
Thanks for reporting. As other people said here and in a few github issues, it is some (supposedly dead) code in nwjs making connections to google properties. These connections will be blocked in the next release. If you want to block them now, edit your package.json by adding this proxy setting:
https://github.com/byteball/byteball/commit/dfdd00808e3ac8f3268e7e346c2009bb403260f5
The location of package.json on Mac is /Applications/Byteball.app/Contents/Resources/app.nw/package.json.
Vlom, great finding!
We need more people like you to test the software. Even with careful developing, such privacy leaks can creep in. Better to eliminate leaks and bugs right from the start!
You have earned a bounty of 1 GB for finding this leak, thank you!
Please post your address here or PM me if you don't want to make it public, thanks.
@CryptKeeper
thank you very much.
you can send me the bytes to this address: 62VPG77DWEHUIDCWJG7BLZFRDUKDI22U
February 07, 2017, 03:05:58 AM
Large buywall at 0.08 liftoff time!
didnt need polo to reach 10 Mill.
February 07, 2017, 02:01:51 AM
Large buywall at 0.08 liftoff time!
February 07, 2017, 01:58:35 AM
In the second round, we'll distribute as much as is linked and calculated by the above rules, the exact % is not known in advance.
could it be 10% at second round ?
1. BTC -> Byte
=> estimated ~100000 BTC linked (at 2. round) => 6250 GByte distributed
2. Byte -> Byte
=> 100000 GBytes (10% from the first round) => 10000 GBytes distributed
3. Total
Total: 16250 GBytes distributed at 2. round => 16250/1000000 = 1,6 %
4. Total distributed 1. + 2. round
11.6 % or 100000 (1. round) + 16250 (2. round) = 116250 Gbytes
thanks
if i got it right there is current total supply of 100 000 Gb.
how come it turns into ammount (116 250 Gb) that exceed this given (100 000 Gb) maximum?
am i rigth that at some moment (when will it come?) total supply will rise to 1 000 000 Gb (10^15 bytes).
February 07, 2017, 12:23:06 AM
Last month someone was kind enough to give a step by step for using the blockchain.info wallet to sync with the byteball issuance. Could someone again please outline the step by step?
Thanks
Thanks
February 06, 2017, 09:17:08 PM
In the second round, we'll distribute as much as is linked and calculated by the above rules, the exact % is not known in advance.
could it be 10% at second round ?
1. BTC -> Byte
=> estimated ~100000 BTC linked (at 2. round) => 6250 GByte distributed
2. Byte -> Byte
=> 100000 GBytes (10% from the first round) => 10000 GBytes distributed
3. Total
Total: 16250 GBytes distributed at 2. round => 16250/1000000 = 1,6 %
4. Total distributed 1. + 2. round
11.6 % or 100000 (1. round) + 16250 (2. round) = 116250 Gbytes
thanks
February 06, 2017, 09:15:10 PM
What is the current blackbyte price? Where can I trade blackbyte?
https://byteball.slack.com/messages/trading_blackbyte/
February 06, 2017, 09:09:26 PM
What is the current blackbyte price? Where can I trade blackbyte?
February 06, 2017, 08:33:07 PM
could someone be so kind and help me out please send me a little love to #KWGIYJOT4AHXTEJQUGFDTO3R4XDEKZOO help me get going if not i do understand, sorry if not allowed no harm meant by this. I was hacked not long ago and they took almost everything i had. I started trading alts a few years ago with $5.68 i made from faucets and traded all the way up to 0.88 BTC that was the highest i ever made it, my goal was 1 Btc. I know it may not be much to some of you but to me that is alot. Thanks and sorry if this is not allowed or makes someone angry, I always helped people when i could when i was doing well because in the beginning i had a few people help me by teaching me the ropes a little
February 06, 2017, 08:24:51 PM
I got a really, really stupid question regarding the 12 witnesses:
Are we necessarily talking about one individual per witness? Or could there be the possibility of "witness pools", as in a group of people cooperating to "form" a single witness? If yes, I can see this as a community approach to decide whether or not they think 12 individuals suffice.
Just a thought.
Its one entity, one key-pair, one node in the network.Are we necessarily talking about one individual per witness? Or could there be the possibility of "witness pools", as in a group of people cooperating to "form" a single witness? If yes, I can see this as a community approach to decide whether or not they think 12 individuals suffice.
Just a thought.
The entity can be represented by an organization, a foundation, a corporation, or a sleepless person.
The 12 witnesses will most probably include all types, and the bestest witnesses will have clear policies to the public and internal policies and rules of governance - like any good foundation and organization has.
@tonych have you contacted the EFF or Free Software Foundation to see if they want to run a witness?
February 06, 2017, 08:08:42 PM
I got a really, really stupid question regarding the 12 witnesses:
Are we necessarily talking about one individual per witness? Or could there be the possibility of "witness pools", as in a group of people cooperating to "form" a single witness? If yes, I can see this as a community approach to decide whether or not they think 12 individuals suffice.
Just a thought.
Are we necessarily talking about one individual per witness? Or could there be the possibility of "witness pools", as in a group of people cooperating to "form" a single witness? If yes, I can see this as a community approach to decide whether or not they think 12 individuals suffice.
Just a thought.
February 06, 2017, 07:34:22 PM
You are correct, if 12 witnesses so decide, they can block all attempts to replace them. But this is exactly what they were expected not to do when they were added themselves. If a minority of witnesses appears untrustworthy, they can be promptly replaced before they reach majority.
I discuss in the whitepaper a mechanism which helps make the behavior of witnesses more predictable and earlier detect any breaches of trust: a would-be witness pledges to follow the witness lists of a few (possibly larger than 12) prominent industry leaders. The pledge is not enforceable in the protocol but publicly auditable, any breach of the pledge would immediately make the witness a candidate for removal.
"Prominent industry leaders" sounds a bit to me like "to big to fail banks". This inherent trust that users have to have in third parties makes me uneasy about the system design and its resilience to abuse. It additionally requires constant attention to the witness list issue and the danger of cartel forming behind the scenes. But I might be wrong and it will work well. Let's hope it will.
There was a recent medium article by Vitalik, discussing decentralization, bitcoin is technically decentralized, but it doesnt stop humans from forming groups - which we are naturally inclined to do - and groups tend to be centralized.
Byteball has a very novel balance between technical and social de/centralization - which makes it a great success.
https://medium.com/@VitalikButerin/the-meaning-of-decentralization-a0c92b76a274#.ezsb3lcnx
February 06, 2017, 07:10:05 PM
You are correct, if 12 witnesses so decide, they can block all attempts to replace them. But this is exactly what they were expected not to do when they were added themselves. If a minority of witnesses appears untrustworthy, they can be promptly replaced before they reach majority.
I discuss in the whitepaper a mechanism which helps make the behavior of witnesses more predictable and earlier detect any breaches of trust: a would-be witness pledges to follow the witness lists of a few (possibly larger than 12) prominent industry leaders. The pledge is not enforceable in the protocol but publicly auditable, any breach of the pledge would immediately make the witness a candidate for removal.
"Prominent industry leaders" sounds a bit to me like "to big to fail banks". This inherent trust that users have to have in third parties makes me uneasy about the system design and its resilience to abuse. It additionally requires constant attention to the witness list issue and the danger of cartel forming behind the scenes. But I might be wrong and it will work well. Let's hope it will.
Jump to: