a proof-of-work for a block could be the total of the fees in
the block.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
off the heads of a centrally controlled
networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be
holding their own.
Satoshi
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography
, and a constant rate seems like
the best formula.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully
peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party.
The paper is available at:
http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
We very, very much need such a system, but the way I understand your
proposal, it does not seem
Dustin D. Trammell wrote:
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
You know, I think there were a lot more people interested in the 90's,
but after more than a decade of failed Trusted Third Party based systems
(Digicash, etc), they see it as a lost cause. I hope they can make the
distinction
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
Increasing hardware speed is handled: To compensate
for increasing hardware speed and varying interest in
running nodes over time, the proof-of-work difficulty
is determined by a moving average targeting an average
number of blocks per hour. If they're generated too
,
and nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the
longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they
were gone.
Full paper at:
http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography
.
It's not a problem if transactions have to wait one or a few extra cycles to
get into a block.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
is coming soon. I sent you the main files.
(available by request at the moment, full release soon)
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in the transaction's comment field.
If the system let users configure the minimum payment they're
willing to receive, or at least the minimum that can have a
message with it, users could set how much they're willing to get
paid to receive spam.
Satoshi Nakamoto
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully
peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party.
The paper is available at:
http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
We very, very much need such a system, but the way I understand your
proposal, it does not seem
--
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
The proof-of-work chain is the solution to the
synchronisation problem, and to knowing what the
globally shared view is without having to trust
anyone.
A transaction will quickly propagate throughout the
network, so if two versions of the same transaction
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:04:21PM -0800, Ray Dillinger wrote:
On Sat, 2008-11-15 at 12:43 +0800, Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
If someone double spends, then the transaction record
can be unblinded revealing the identity of the cheater.
Identities are not used, and there's no reliance
.
The Bitcoin network might actually reduce spam by diverting zombie farms to
generating bitcoins instead.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in
the chain, it is firmly etched into the global history.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to include all the paying transactions they receive.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
that simple altruism can suffice to keep the
network running properly.
It's very attractive to the libertarian viewpoint if we can explain it
properly. I'm better with code than with words though.
Satoshi Nakamoto
on open market competition, and there will
probably always be nodes willing to process transactions for free.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com
Satoshi Nakamoto writes:
Announcing the first release of Bitcoin, a new electronic cash
system that uses a peer-to-peer network to prevent double-spending.
It's completely decentralized with no server or central authority.
See bitcoin.org for screenshots.
Download link:
http
think I will be able to release the code
sooner than I could write a detailed spec. You're already right about most of
your assumptions where you filled in the blanks.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
controlled.
Right.
You need coin aggregation for this to scale. There needs to be
a provable transaction where someone retires ten single coins
and creates a new coin with denomination ten, etc.
Every transaction is one of these. Section 9, Combining and Splitting Value.
Satoshi Nakamoto
anyway.
Satoshi Nakamoto
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
The bandwidth might not be as prohibitive as you
think. A typical transaction would be about 400 bytes
(ECC is nicely compact). Each transaction has to be
broadcast twice, so lets say 1KB per transaction.
Visa processed 37 billion transactions in FY2008
James A. Donald wrote:
It is not sufficient that everyone knows X. We also
need everyone to know that everyone knows X, and that
everyone knows that everyone knows that everyone knows X
- which, as in the Byzantine Generals problem, is the
classic hard problem of distributed data processing.
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009, Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
[[various possible uses of Bitcoin et al]]
Once it gets bootstrapped, there are so many
applications if you could effortlessly pay a few cents to a
website as easily as dropping coins in a vending machine.
In the modern world, no major government
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
When there are multiple double-spent versions of the
same transaction, one and only one will become valid.
That is not the question I am asking.
It is not trust that worries me, it is how it is
possible to have a a globally shared view even if
everyone is well behaved
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
Fortunately, it's only necessary to keep a
pending-transaction pool for the current best branch.
This requires that we know, that is to say an honest
well behaved peer whose communications and data storage
is working well knows, what the current best branch
spends, and both proofs are generated at about
the same time.
What happens then?
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
They both broadcast their blocks. All nodes receive
them and keep both, but only work on the one they
received first. We'll suppose exactly half received
one first, half the other
James A. Donald writes:
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
When there are multiple double-spent versions of the
same transaction, one and only one will become valid.
That is not the question I am asking.
It is not trust that worries me, it is how it is
possible to have a a globally shared view
. If hundreds of millions of people
are doing transactions, that is a lot of bandwidth -
each must know all, or a substantial part thereof.
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
Long before the network gets anywhere near as large as
that, it would be Safe for users to use Simplified
Payment Verification
On Sat, 2008-11-15 at 12:43 +0800, Satoshi Nakamoto wrote:
I'll try and hurry up and release the sourcecode as soon as possible
to serve as a reference to help clear up all these implementation
questions.
Ray Dillinger (Bear) wrote:
When a coin is spent, the buyer and seller digitally
31 matches
Mail list logo
