05-17 16:14 - '[bitcoin/bitcoin] repository has been mentioned **7 times** on Reddit over the last 7 days. / The last 3 mentions: / |Mention|Source| |---|---| |[..] that someone else in fact did steal commits—a fact of which nobody including...' by /u/gitspo removed from /r/Bitcoin within 361-371min
''' [bitcoin/bitcoin]1 repository has been mentioned 7 times on Reddit over the last 7 days. The last 3 mentions:
[..] that someone else in fact did steal commits—a fact of which nobody including the posters of this lie seem to care about. [gmaxwell] looks like github may be compromised or badly broken: [link]7 gmaxwell was reproducing the github bug which we were all attempting to investigate and theorize about. yea, okay. I reproduced the stupidity. in any case, I went and reserved all the other dotless names in the history. .. looks [..]
bitcoin/bitcoin [ [link]9 ] repository has been mentioned 31 times over the last 7 days.The last 3 mentions: [..] - msbuild FreeCAD_Trunk.sln /p:TrackFileAccess=false /p:CLToolExe=clcache.exe /p:CLToolPath=c:\Python37\Scripts\ /m - ps: fsutil behavior set disablelastaccess 1 from the bitcoin guys: [..]
02-03 06:47 - 'The what now? Bitcoin repository? / You are confusing bitcoin with the development of the bitcoin client. Individual clients are developed by teams and some teams works best with a dedicated leader. Bitcoin itself has no lead...' by /u/Pretagonist removed from /r/Bitcoin within 2-7min
''' The what now? Bitcoin repository? You are confusing bitcoin with the development of the bitcoin client. Individual clients are developed by teams and some teams works best with a dedicated leader. Bitcoin itself has no leader, it shouldn't have. Bitcoin itself is a consensus, whatever protocol is used by most miners IS bitcoin. There's a system in place for proposing changes to the protocol for sure but until it's actually implemented by miners it's just suggestions. ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: Pretagonist
10-10 23:02 - '[quote] It's disturbing to me to an Orwellian degree that you do not address the fact that the majority of commits to the bitcoin/bitcoin repository now come from individuals directly or indirectly paid by Blokstream (NOT indivi...' by /u/p2pecash removed from /r/Bitcoin within 1-6min
Such entitlement doesn't exist in free blockchain environments.
It's disturbing to me to an Orwellian degree that you do not address the fact that the majority of commits to the bitcoin/bitcoin repository now come from individuals directly or indirectly paid by Blokstream (NOT individuals committing code to the repo, the % of total commits of code to the repository by individuals financed by this group). You are suggesting brinksmanship and discounting the reality that most 'core' developers are now paid by a privately funded company. That makes it much easier to compromise, because if the executives controlling that company decide to make it so, suddenly a large percentage (the majority in fact) of core developers in terms of commit activity WILL back whatever compromise is proposed and accepted. Everything I am writing can be easily verified with google searches and checking the repository, and adding up commits. I would appreciate it if the moderators would refrain from banning me, or censoring my post. Thanks. ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: p2pecash
Good news everyone! Since June 25th, we have raised over 1.8 BTC on Tip4Commit to automatically reward contributions to the Bitcoin Core repository on GitHub. If you want to support development, this is a great service to donate to!
In part 3 of his extended Q&A with developers, Andreas talks about the ossification of the bitcoin protocol as more layers continue to be built on top of it (if you'd like to watch, here's a direct link to that portion). In light of this, and as we potentially stand on the precipice of the next bitcoin bull market, I feel like there's no time like the present to encourage development of the protocol before we see it ossify completely. So with that, I'd like to say THANK YOU to the individuals/groups who have donated 1.8 BTC in ~2 days to Tip4Commit, which directly rewards commits to the bitcoin repository on GitHub with 1% of the donation pool at the time of approval. I know the foundation and companies like BitPay pay salaries for core developers, but Tip4Commit helps to reward commits by new or erratic contributors and serves as a nice little bonus for those that contribute regularly. In my past life I was a compensation consultant, and one of the things I find particularly appealing about rewarding contributions to bitcoin core with bitcoin is it creates an "equity stake", if you will, for the individual that receives the payment. If I'm a solid developer and I just heard about bitcoin, I can work on core and build a bitcoin stake that way. Once I have a stake, I'm even more incentivized to continue contributing since that's one way for me to increase the value of my bitcoin. Anyways, thanks everyone, and if you haven't had a chance yet please consider donating! It can be done anonymously as well, no need to setup an account. Here is the link again to the bitcoin core donation: http://tip4commit.com/projects/2 And if you're interested, you can also contribute to OpenBazaar: http://tip4commit.com/projects/728
Who approves changes on the Bitcoin code in github?
I still don't understand how that works. Imagine I solve an issue on the Bitcoin's current code and I want to push it to the Bitcoin repository, who confirms it? If someone can handle me a link that explains this part, that'd be great!
GitHub Screenshot - by Snipping tool-- Win OS Are there any programmers in /bitcoin ? Probably. I was wondering if you would give me any advice on contributing to the Bitcoin repository on Github. Am still kinda a novice in C ++ Programming. When I look at the bitcoin source code, it feels overwhelming and complex. However, my desire to contribute to the repository is BURNING inside me!! So, where should I start? No insults please... Thank you!
I'm thankful to the NYA backers because they are proving that bitcoin cannot be taken over by a group of corporate insiders, even with more than 51% hash power.
It's Thanksgiving weekend in Canada and I wanted to share how grateful I am for so much. In the spirit of friendliness in particular, I'm reaching out to all those companies who have signed on to the NYA and still intend to go ahead with trying activate a hard fork that users and developers did not sign up for. We can only see just how anti-fragile and unbreakable bitcoin is when it is put to real world tests. The failure of the NYA to take over bitcoin will demonstrate how bitcoin is able to defeat such an attack, and for that I'm grateful that we have a real world test to prove this. (It will prove many critics of bitcoin wrong and increase bitcoin's known security, appeal and price). For years, people have wondered if bitcoin could withstand an attack from within. "What if 51% of the mining hash power were used to try to change bitcoin?" they asked. This was such a question that when mining pools first became large, even the largest one encouraged miners to leave it when its share of hash power approached 51%. Today, it is clear that mining is highly centralized way beyond 51% in the hands of very few people. And like all industries there's a few strong leaders in market share in mining and in wallets. That's cool. But what happens if a bunch of those guys get in a room and try to take over bitcoin? Well, as it turns out, first, they have to do a hard fork - not just a hard fork of the blockchain, but of the github code repository. They stop making contributions to the main bitcoin repository at github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin, because that's community controlled. Instead they copy the whole repository and put it into a fork they control. And they have to break to the consensus rules or they won't have really taken over anything, so in this case they've gone with the seemingly innocuous 2MB block size consensus rule change. But for them to truly take over it turns out they need to do a lot more than just this. They need to convince the market of users and investors that their new forked coins are worth more than the original coins. Right now, they are pretending that a coin's value comes from their mining power and their businesses' market share of whatever their businesses do. But even before the moment of truth of forking, we see how that's not true. Miners don't mine the chain that they believe in or claim to be committed to. They mine the chain that is most profitable to mine on. The last hard fork has proved this in spades. And businesses won't turn away business from the original chain. We already see Erik Voorhees, one of the most vocal and committed NYAers, saying on twitter that his business will still support the original chain. In short, the original chain will have more valuable coins, which will mean that miners will continue to mine it and businesses will continue to deal in it and the NYA will be just another altcoin launch (with an airdrop to bitcoin holders). For demonstrating bitcoin's ability to shrug off such an attack I am truly grateful to the NYA businesses.
Real-life evidence of the breadown of Bitcoin's (BTC) security model.
This post presents a simple procedure that permits: 1) the invalidation of a transaction recently sent by a payer to a payee, and; 2) the clawback of the coins associated with the transaction. This proof allows us to infer the following: a) Corecoin/SegWitcoin's trustlessness model is irremediably crippled. In this post, we call Corecoin/Segwitcoin the version of Bitcoin forcibly and probably intentionally degraded by a Blockstream-influenced developer group (for those who know about the politics of Bitcoin repository, you know I am being polite) b) The current crippled version of Bitcoin is unusable/untrustworthy for on-chain exchange-of-value (a critical property of money). c) Any contraption that does not display a critical property of money is not money. Q.E.D.: **Corecoin/Segwitcoin is not money.** Any investment made under the belief that Bitcoin is money is unsound and should be reconsidered. The effect of this discovery on the fiat value of Bitcoin (in USD or Euros) is yet to be quantified. ///////////////////////////// (long-read begins here, skip to DEMONSTRATION below if you are in a rush)
If we wanted to completely explain the reasoning underpinning every assertion of this demonstration, this post should be several thousands of words long. Therefore we will provide ample references throughout, and will leave it to the reader to fill in some blanks and discuss any flaws in the comments section. We are fully aware there are ample opportunities for nit-picking. C'est la vie. btw English is my 3rd spoken language, laugh with me of my flaws. About Zero-Confirmation transactions (0-conf) The original version of Bitcoin allowed for so-called "0-conf transactions". Although far from being perfectly secure, they allowed for the convenient and quick exchange of value between parties, at a reasonably and acceptable low risk, akin to that of currency forgery, in-person fraud and third-party processors charge backs. Here is a pertinent thread where Satoshi discusses this feature:
The 2 main features of 0-confirmation are: 1) A payer can spend his own change right away 2) Miners "generally" enforce "first-seen" policy - Optional, but they have an incentive to do so, and it's been indirectly but clearly demonstrated by some Peter Todd shenanigans with a Chinese miner. Political bonus: Gavin Andresen and Tom Harding had devised a way to increase the security of 0-conf, but it was rejected by the Blockstream-influenced repository maintainers. Suggested reading: On Zero Confirmation Transactions https://chrispacia.wordpress.com/2015/11/29/on-zero-confirmation-transactions/ About Replace by fee transaction (RBF) After the briefly described political fiasco (above), Peter Todd managed to get RBF committed into the Bitcoin code. The thinking goes like this "The miners are rational profit maximizers: let them accept higher fees if people are offering it". That was the end of 0-conf in Corecoin/Segwitcoin. Political bonus: It was at this point that Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn were shunned and for all intent and purposes excluded from providing any meaningful development work for Bitcoin Core. A "standard operating procedure" still to this day: toe the party line, and you are made "incommunicado". Very convenient when Blocstream partisans "demonstrate" the absence of evidence of centralised control of the repository. Typical rebuttal example: https://medium.com/@whalecalls/fud-or-fact-blockstream-inc-is-the-main-force-behind-bitcoin-and-taken-over-160aed93c003 What a bunch of bozos. Remember folks: Absence of evidence =/= Evidence of absence! /////////////////////////////
PRELUDE TO THE DEMO
The preceding section introduced a way to "double spend" a coin before its associated transaction is included in a block by a miner (RBF). Originally this "attack" vector also had a time constraint: since 95%+ of transactions were pickep-up in the very next block, speed was of the essence for the attacker. Not anymore. Why? Nowadays, it is not unusual for the mempool backlog to stay for extended periods of time above 40,000 transactions, with recent peaks way above 200,000 transactions. Assuming 2,500 transactions per block, this represents a backlog of 16 to 80 blocks. Naively assuming an even distribution of fees, the time required to process a transaction with an average fee is therefore 80 to 400 minutes + processing of incoming transactions. So: 80 to 400 minutes is an absolute best-case scenario (only a backlog, no incoming transacions). We could pull our fancy pencil and produce a detailled granulometry, but here it's not the point, the point is: 80 to 400 minutes is a long time, and most likely it will be days. I hope we all agree that a span of 80 minutes to several days is a long time to conduct an attack! Bonus: I will spare you the story about the extension of the mempool's expiring delay, another blatant proof of Core's failure. To witness the memory pool fiasco on the Corecoin/Segwitcoin chain (special thanks to nullc, please google: "Jochen mempool" or "Joehoe's mempool" Remember folks: Time is money. /////////////////////////////
What proof can you gives give me that Blockstream essentially has a stranglehold on the development team and its direction?
After drawn out debates I can't find conclusive proof other than the blatant censorship on reddit. Opponents in this debate say that Blockstream employees only account for 25% of all commits to the bitcoin repository. When can I find conclusive evidence that it's more than that. How did they effectively kickout Gaven Andresen from the team?
Mit der nachfolgenden Zeile fügt man die Repositories des Bitcoin Clients zur Ubuntu hinzu. sudo apt-add-repository ppa:bitcoin/bitcoin Auf manchen Minimal-System mag das nicht von Anfang an funktionieren. Es macht immer Sinn, erweiterte Python-Software zu installieren: Das geht mit: sudo apt-get install software-properties-common. und/oder Package bsvutil provides Bitcoin (BSV) specific convenience functions and types. A comprehensive suite of tests is provided to ensure proper functionality. This package was developed for bsvd, a full-node implementation of Bitcoin (BSV). Although it was primarily written for bsvd, this package has intentionally been designed so it can be used as a standalone package for any projects needing ... Erpressungswelle zielt auf öffentliche Git-Repositorys Seit einigen Tagen haben Erpresser zahlreiche Repositorys bei GitHub, GitLab und BitBucket gelöscht und fordern Bitcoins für die ... GitHub, a platform where software developers from across the globe discover, share and build software, is now being attacked by hackers who aim to hijack and encrypt users’ code for a Bitcoin ransom, according to a Vice report on May 3, 2019.. Code for Bitcoin . Per sources close to the matter, bad actors have now devised a new means to extort developers by hijacking code repositories ... Bitcoin SV has 6 repositories available. Follow their code on GitHub.
BITCOIN NEXT MAJOR MOVE WILL BE TERRIFYING (btc crypto live market news price today ta analysis) - Duration: 48:04. Crypto Crew University 28,504 views. New Overnight Repos are a clear sign of BIG Trouble! #Bitcoin is the cure for this! https://www.patreon.com/bitcoinben Please help me spread the crypto message b... Bitcoin and Altcoins Repository: it is an educational and training channel that develops fundamental and current issues of the "crypto" ecosystem. Our goal is to bring the user high quality and ... I recently had my first pull request merged to the bitcoin repo. In this video I go over the pull request process on the bitcoin repository on github. I show how to clone the repo, make a new ... Bitcoin BOUNCE IMMINENT?! 🧨 FED REPO Crisis, Korea Update Ivan on Tech. Loading... Unsubscribe from Ivan on Tech? Cancel Unsubscribe. Working... Subscribe Subscribed Unsubscribe 233K. Loading ...