-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/18/13 8:09 PM, John Dillon wrote:
On the other hand, a tx with some txin proofs can be safely relayed by SPV
nodes, an interesting concept. Do the UTXO commitment people have
keeping proof
size small in mind?
More than a kilobyte, probably
I've posted a somewhat blue-skies idea on troll^wBitcointalk that some
here might find interesting:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=277389.0
--
Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite!
It's
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:09 AM, John Dillon
john.dillon...@googlemail.comwrote:
Here's another question for you Mike: So does bitcoinj have any
protections against peers flooding you with useless garbage? It'd be
easy to rack up a user's data bill for instance by just creating junk
Pull request https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2905 proposes to
remove getwork RPC from bitcoind: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork
On mainnet, almost everybody uses a pool (and therefore, not getwork
directly to bitcoind). Those few who solo mine use a pool server to
talk to bitcoind via
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Frank F frank...@gmail.com wrote:
I strongly object to removing the only mechanism that allows anyone to say
that bitcoin is p2p, in the truest sense of the word. Moves like this that
favor only the pool operators and private mining interests are signs that
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Frank F frank...@gmail.com wrote:
If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be addressed
and fixed instead of outright abandoned.
They have been, resulting in a replacement called getblocktemplate
which (presumably) almost everyone talking
FWIW, Litecoin 0.8.x entirely removed the internal miner and we warned
people that getwork will be removed in the next major version. Pooler's
CPU minerd which supports both sha256d and scrypt recently grew stratum
support. Perhaps he could be convinced to add GBT support too, which would
help
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wtog...@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW, Litecoin 0.8.x entirely removed the internal miner and we warned
people that getwork will be removed in the next major version. Pooler's CPU
minerd which supports both sha256d and scrypt recently grew stratum
Removing getwork and the old miner and packaging a better miner seems
the best solution for the reasons already mentioned.
Not directly related, but this remembered me that we planned to
remove the accounting features on freicoin. We don't want to adapt
them for demurrage and we think business
On 08/19/2013 10:34 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
FWIW, Litecoin 0.8.x entirely removed the internal miner and we warned
people that getwork will be removed in the next major version. Pooler's CPU
minerd which supports both sha256d and scrypt recently grew stratum support.
Perhaps he could be
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Andreas Petersson andr...@petersson.atwrote:
I was just reviewing the integration work to integrate the Payment
Protocol into our products. Is there any notion of a standardized
invoice serialisation? If i pay for two Burgers and one Club Mate, how
would my
11 matches
Mail list logo
