User:
KamasylviaAdditional information (optional):
* This user also suspected using AI,
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63976679.
List of post:
Perishable UTXOs and the concept you propose for their handling is an intriguing idea. However, it is important to consider some challenges and potential implications before implementing such a change into the Bitcoin protocol.
Quantum computing: While your intention to avoid quantum computing vulnerabilities is commendable, the proposed implementation may have limitations. It assumes that all Bitcoin users will upgrade their addresses to a quantum-resistant format within a certain timeframe. If users fail to do so, their UTXOs could become unspendable, potentially leading to loss of funds for those users.
Concept of perishable UTXO actually let miner take UTXO (above certain age) for themselves. So saying "their UTXOs could become unspendable" is simply wrong.
Batal mengrim Bitcoin dari Electrum ke wallet exchanger gara-gara fee nya lumayan tinggi.. bahkan ane tadi waktu ingin mengirim sempat di angka lebih dari 1200 sat/vB
Soal tingginya fee transaksi di jaringan blockhain Bitcoin... ane rasa ini ada hubungannya dengan
launchingnya sistem berbasis Bitcoin yang baru bernama "Runes"Seperti sebelum-sebelumnya, tingginya fee ini pasti akan normal lagi dalam beberapa waktu kemudian setelah hype nya turun. Sembari holding BTC untuk menyambut halving Bitcoin yang sudah terjadi pagi tadi.
Wah sepertinya Casey Rodamor lagi-lagi membuat ulah, jika sebelumnya dia menciptakan Ordinals, sekarang dia kembali dengan ide baru yakni Runes yang sama-sama berjalan di Jaringan Bitcoin. Yang membuatnya berbeda jika Ordinals adalah berjenis Non-fungible token (NFT), sementara kalo Runes adalah fungible token yang hanya merupakan meme coin. Release Runes dimulai saat jaringan Bitcoin mencapai block height 840.000.
Yang sedikit aneh meningkatnya fee transaksi di jaringan Mainnet Bitcoin, ternyata juga menular ke Jaringan Testnet Bitcoin, yang saat ini untuk Recommended fee (6 Blocks) telah mencapai level 48.5 sat/vB. Padahal biasanya untuk jaringan testnet rata-rata fee rekomendasiny ada di sekitaran 0.2 - 1 sat/vB. Ane sempet mencoba melakukan transaksi dengan menggunakan fee rekomendasi 48.5 sat/vB di jaringan testnet, ternyata baru mendapatkan 1 konfirmasi block setelah menunggu 21 Menit.
Memang terkadang ada keterkaitan antara biaya transaksi di jaringan utama (Mainnet) dan jaringan uji coba (Testnet) Bitcoin. Ketika ada peningkatan permintaan dan biaya transaksi yang tinggi di jaringan utama, mungkin juga mempengaruhi tingkat fee yang direkomendasikan di jaringan testnet.
Meskipun jaringan testnet berfungsi sebagai lingkungan uji coba, banyak orang menggunakan testnet untuk menguji aplikasi, protokol, dan smart contract sebelum diterapkan di jaringan utama. Jika ada peningkatan aktivitas pengujian di testnet, maka permintaan untuk melakukan transaksi di testnet juga bisa meningkat, sehingga mempengaruhi biaya transaksi yang direkomendasikan.
Dalam kasus Agan menggunakan fee rekomendasi 48.5 sat/vB di jaringan testnet dan mendapatkan konfirmasi dalam 21 menit masih tergolong baik. Biasanya, jaringan testnet mungkin lebih cepat dalam mengonfirmasi transaksi, tetapi jika ada peningkatan aktivitas, waktu konfirmasi bisa meningkat.
Ini adalah aspek yang perlu dipertimbangkan saat menggunakan jaringan testnet, terutama jika ada keterkaitan dengan situasi di jaringan utama. Penting juga untuk memperhatikan rekomendasi biaya transaksi yang diberikan oleh dompet atau layanan Bitcoin yang Agan gunakan, karena setiap platform dapat memiliki metode perhitungan fee yang berbeda.
For reference, this post written using Indonesian language.
1. Usually there's almost no correlation between mempool activity on mainnet and testnet. See
https://mempool.space/graphs/mempool#1y and
https://mempool.space/testnet/graphs/mempool#1y.
2. Both mainnet and testnet have same 10 minutes block time. So saying testnet might be faster to confirm a transaction is wrong.
3. There's no need to pay attention to mainnet for determining fee for creating TX fee.
AntMiners are primarily designed for mining Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH), which both utilize the SHA-256 algorithm. However, there are also models available that can mine other cryptocurrencies which are compatible with the SHA-256 algorithm.
On the other hand, WhatsMiners, specifically WhatsMiner M20 series, are capable of mining various cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and other coins that use the SHA-256 algorithm. They can also mine other algorithms such as Scrypt and X11.
Both AntMiners and WhatsMiners come with pre-installed firmware that allows them to mine specific cryptocurrencies. However, it's possible to download and install custom firmware or software to modify their mining capabilities. This can enable you to tweak settings, optimize performance, or mine different cryptocurrencies. However, it's important to note that modifying the firmware may void the warranty and any potential support from the manufacturer.
Regarding operating systems, AntMiners and WhatsMiners run on custom-built firmware that serves as their operating system. These firmware versions provide an interface for configuring the devices, monitoring mining statistics, and managing your mining operations.
In terms of algorithm modification, the default algorithm for AntMiners is SHA-256, and for WhatsMiners, it depends on the model but typically includes SHA-256, Scrypt, and X11 algorithms. While it may be possible to modify the firmware to support different algorithms, it's generally not a straightforward process and can be challenging. It's essential to ensure compatibility and consider the power and performance limitations of the hardware before attempting any modifications.
When considering mining equipment, it's crucial to research the specific models you're interested in, as there are various versions and generations available with different capabilities and specifications. Additionally, mining profitability can vary depending on factors such as electricity costs, network difficulty, and market conditions.
1. AntMiner is name of a company. They create all kinds of ASIC, not only SHA-256 ASIC.
2. WhatsMiners is brand name from company MicroBT. They also create all kinds of ASIC, not only SHA-256 ASIC.
2. Looking at
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/reviewguide-whatsminer-m20s-680-ths-3260-w-bitcoin-sha-256-asic-miner-5155468 and
https://www.asicminervalue.com/miners/microbt/whatsminer-m20s, there's no mention that WhatsMiner M20S support either X11 or scrypt.
Yes, you are correct that Bitcoin's use case has evolved over time due to changes in opcode rules. Opcodes enable the execution of specific operations within a Bitcoin transaction. When new opcode subsets are released, it can modify the rules of Bitcoin by allowing for different data sizes and validation processes.
The introduction of new opcodes can increase the data capacity of a transaction, allowing for the inclusion of additional information that may not be directly related to the intended purpose of the transaction. While some Bitcoin nodes may not validate or analyze the content of such added data, it still becomes a part of the transaction.
1. Opcodes on Bitcoin does more than allowing different data sizes or verification. Other reader may check
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script to verify my statement.
2. Actually only node with outdated software or using software which intentionally doesn't implement certain stuff unable to properly validate unsupported/unknown opcodes.
1. TX fee on sidechain usually is extremely low, so using LN bring little benefit in terms of TX fee.
2. Whether you open LN channel from Bitcoin mainnet or sidechain, you get same benefit (microtransaction and fast confirmation).
User:
marcosadelacruzAdditional information (optional): -
List of post:
I have been thinking a lot about this topic these days, but we must keep the following in mind:
Risks:
- Protocol complexity: Adding tokens and smart contracts introduces extra complexity to Bitcoin's protocol. This could expand the attack surface and raise the likelihood of vulnerabilities that might compromise the network's security and stability.
- Potential implementation errors: Whenever new features are introduced, there's always the risk of implementation errors that could be exploited for malicious attacks or cause network failures. This could undermine trust in Bitcoin and impact its adoption and value.
- Scalability impact: Incorporating functionalities like tokens and smart contracts might strain Bitcoin's network and hinder its ability to scale effectively. This could lead to network congestion, higher fees, and longer confirmation times, negatively affecting user experience.
Benefits:
- Expanded use cases: Implementing BRC-20 could allow for a wider range of use cases on the Bitcoin network, attracting new users, developers, and businesses to the ecosystem. This could drive adoption and long-term value for Bitcoin.
- Interoperability with other ecosystems: Compatibility with tokens and smart contracts could streamline interoperability between Bitcoin and other blockchain ecosystems, fostering collaboration and synergy among different projects and communities.
- Continuous innovation and development: Bitcoin's ability to adapt and evolve is crucial for its long-term sustainability. Implementing new functionalities like BRC-20 could encourage innovation and ongoing development in the Bitcoin ecosystem, strengthening its position as a market leader in the cryptocurrency space.
For reference, this reply was created under BRC-20 thread.
1. BRC-20 isn't smart contract.
2. BRC-20 doesn't offer feature to add turing-complete script either.
3. BRC-20 (which rely on Ordinal) isn't part of Bitcoin protocol. So it can't be exploited to cause Bitcoin network failure or add vulnerability to Bitcoin network.