Hence ship a miner that automatically reads the bitcoin.conf to find the
RPC authentication info. It would be faster and more efficient than the
unoptimized miner while simplifying the bitcoind code. Win for everyone.
Warren
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Andreas Schildbach
wrote:
> On 08/1
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Andreas Petersson wrote:
> 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 Bitcoin Wallet be a
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 b
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 sho
John,
I for one support your rallying cry of decentralization.
If you are implying that even 10,000 full nodes seems far, far too few for a
distributed system that may ultimately face a very well-connected and
well-funded threat model, I agree with you completely. However, I took Gavin's
state
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 Bitcoin Wallet be able to know that? Right now, i would simply
put that into "memo" an
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Goss, Brian C., M.D.
wrote:
> What if we have a massive (like many orders of magnitude) drop in network
> harsh rate? Might such a function be useful to salvage the (non-functioning)
> network? Same for IRC bootstrapping. How do we pick ourselves up off the
>
What if we have a massive (like many orders of magnitude) drop in network harsh
rate? Might such a function be useful to salvage the (non-functioning)
network? Same for IRC bootstrapping. How do we pick ourselves up off the
ground in case of the equivalent of a great depression in network hash
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Warren Togami Jr. 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
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 th
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I think removing the ability to mine in the stock package would be
> regrettable,
I am naughty and should clarify. I had ass.u.me.d that Jeff's patch
also removed the internal CPU miner, because doing so is necessary for
actually getting
This sounds like an ideal compromise.
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Frank F wrote:
> > If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be
> addressed
> > and fixed instead of outright abandoned.
>
> They have been, re
Thank you for setting me straight. Please forgive my ignorance.
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Frank F wrote:
> > I strongly object to removing the only mechanism that allows anyone to
> say
> > that bitcoin is p2p, in the truest sense
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Frank F 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 to bitcoin(d|-q
ACK, I see no reason to leave broken things in that a) arent necessary
and b) no one has the developer resources to fix.
Matt
On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 12:27 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Pull request https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2905 proposes to
> remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind: https:/
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Frank F 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
> bitcoin is headed
On Monday, August 19, 2013 8:09:41 PM Frank F 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
> bitcoin is hea
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
bitcoin is headed towards a monopoly/cartel model, and that would be a
trag
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
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 2:13 AM, Peter Todd wrote:
> In any case given that SPV peers don't contribute back to the network
> they should obviously be heavily deprioritized and served only with
> whatever resources a node has spare.
Well, I'm glad we're making progress towards this kind of model
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:09 AM, John Dillon
wrote:
> > 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
> > unconfirmed transactions ma
21 matches
Mail list logo
