WARNING: If you try to use the Lightning Network you are at extremely HIGH RISK of losing funds and is not recommended or safe to do at this time or for the foreseeable future (274 points, 168 comments)
The guy who won this week's MillionaireMakers drawing has received ~$55 in BCH and ~$30 in BTC. It will cost him less than $0.01 to move the BCH, but $6.16 (20%) in fees to move the BTC. (164 points, 100 comments)
Do you think Bitcoin needs to increase the block size? You're in luck! It already did: Bitcoin BCH. Avoid the upcoming controversial BTC block size debate by trading your broken Bitcoin BTC for upgraded Bitcoin BCH now. (209 points, 194 comments)
Master list of evidence regarding Bitcoin's hijacking and takeover by Blockstream (185 points, 113 comments)
PSA: BTC not working so great? Bitcoin upgraded in 2017. The upgraded Bitcoin is called BCH. There's still time to upgrade! (185 points, 192 comments)
This sub is the only sub in all of Reddit that allows truly uncensored discussion of BTC. If it turns out that most of that uncensored discussion is negative, DON'T BLAME US. (143 points, 205 comments)
211 points: fireduck's comment in John Mcafee on the run from IRS Tax Evasion charges, running 2020 Presidential Campaign from Venezuela in Exile
203 points: WalterRothbard's comment in I am a Bitcoin supporter and developer, and I'm starting to think that Bitcoin Cash could be better, but I have some concerns, is anyone willing to discuss them?
163 points: YourBodyIsBCHn's comment in I made this account specifically to tip in nsfw/gonewild subreddits
161 points: BeijingBitcoins's comment in Last night's BCH & BTC meetups in Tokyo were both at the same restaurant (Two Dogs). We joined forces for this group photo!
156 points: hawks5999's comment in You can’t make this stuff up. This is how BTC supporters actually think. From bitcoin: “What you can do to make BTC better: check twice if you really need to use it!” 🤦🏻♂️
155 points: lowstrife's comment in Steve Wozniak Sold His Bitcoin at Its Peak $20,000 Valuation
151 points: kdawgud's comment in The government is taking away basic freedoms we each deserve
147 points: m4ktub1st's comment in BCH suffered a 51% attack by colluding miners to re-org the chain in order to reverse transactions - why is nobody talking about this? Dangerous precident
147 points: todu's comment in Why I'm not a fan of the SV community: My recent bill for defending their frivolous lawsuit against open source software developers.
NBA Says Basketball Player Can’t Tokenize His Contract After All
News by Coindesk: Nikhilesh De Spencer Dinwiddie took a shot at tokenization, but the National Basketball Association blocked him. The NBA said Friday that Dinwiddie’s plan to pledge part of his contract earnings for a security token offering violates the league’s collective bargaining agreement, according to the New York Times. “The described arrangement is prohibited by the C.B.A., which provides that ‘no player shall assign or otherwise transfer to any third party his right to receive compensation from the team under his uniform player contract,’” the league said. Dinwiddie appeared to disagree with the assessment, writing on Twitter, “The architecture by definition is not an assignment lol FUD.” It is unclear if the NBA spoke to Dinwiddie before providing the statement to the Times. However, the Brooklyn Nets guard indicated that he had told the league about his intentions before they were publicly announced, writing, “to put this quite simply I’m not assigning my contract and have been explicit in that when I’ve spoken to them.” “The news tonight is disappointing because all it does is inspire #FUD in the birth of a previously unrealized asset class under the assumption that I’m breaking a rule that I’ve been clear I’m not breaking in multiple conversation,” he wrote, concluding:
“I look forward to an understanding because as I stated in the previous articles it was made with the @NBA in mind. Hopefully being able to bring added fan engagement to the different players/teams and liquidity for team owners.”
A publicist for Dinwiddie did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for the NBA sent CoinDesk the same statement shared with the Times.
Dinwiddie revealed Thursday that he intended to tokenize part of his contract on the ethereum blockchain, in order to raise $13.5 million from his three-year, $35 million contract (Dinwiddie is set to make $16 million in his first year). As part of the DREAM Fan Shares platform, Dinwiddie outlined a company where any entertainer could tokenize their contract, raising part of their salary upfront to invest or otherwise use immediately. Token holders would receive Dinwiddie’s regular salary payments, recouping their investments and earning interest. Paxos Trust Company was set to provide custody and escrow services for the project, paying investors out in the Paxos Standard stablecoin. The company was unavailable for comment on Friday. Dinwiddie’s plan is receiving public support: on Friday, presidential candidate Andrew Yang, who has praised blockchain in the past and suggested a federal framework for cryptocurrency regulation, wrote that he thought the plan was “genius.” He added that he was “disappointed the NBA is disallowing it.” Earlier Friday, Dinwiddie also revealed that he had partnered with the Tron Foundation and its CEO, Justin Sun, to donate 8.2 bitcoin to charity by selling his game-worn shoes for the 2019/2020 season. He reassured fans that regardless of the NBA’s possible issues with his contract plan, he would make the donation, writing:
“Also, in case you were worried I’m still going to give the 8.2btc to charity from my shoes lol”
Afternoon, All. Today marks the eighth anniversary of the publication of the Bitcoin white paper. As a special tribute, I will provide you with a short story on the origins of the Bitcoin tech. I've been out of the game for many years, however now I find myself drawn back - in part due to the energy that's being added by the incumbents, in part due to information that's become public over the past year. I haven't followed the Bitcoin and alt coin tech for the past five or six years. I left about six months before (2). My last communication with (2) was five years ago which ended in my obliteration of all development emails and long-term exile. Every mention of Bitcoin made me turn the page, change the channel, click away - due to a painful knot of fear in my belly at the very mention of the tech. As my old memories come back I'm jotting them down so that a roughly decent book on the original Bitcoin development may be created. The following are a few of these notes. This is still in early draft form so expect the layout and flow to be cleaned up over time. Also be aware that the initial release of the Bitcoin white paper and code was what we had cut down to from earlier ideas. This means that some of the ideas below will not correspond to what would end up being made public. Bitcoin Logo BitCoin Origins Six Months In A Leaky Boat Introduction I have always found that there’s a vast gulf between knowledge and understanding. Wherever I looked I’ve found very intelligent folks who had immense knowledge in their subject but with little understanding of what to do with it, how to mould it, how to create something new. They could only ever iterate incrementally to improve the knowledge in their given field. Understanding comes from experiences outside of knowledge in a particular subject. The following story is about a most unique project and the understanding that was used and applied to the e-cash problem which resulted in the experiment called Bitcoin. It is to show the thought process, stream of consciousness, arguments, examples, concerns and fears that went through our minds has we tussled with this beast and hammered out something that may actually work. There is no verification of truth here. There is absolutely no evidential proof that I had any part in the project. All evidence was purged in late 2011 - the reason will become apparent. Only (2) should know of my involvement (until now). Take this as just a fictional story if you wish. Who am I ? I went by the ‘net handle Scronty back then. scrontsoft.com I have always been interested in computer and electronic technology since the age of eleven. Seeing what others had made these machines do, and then trying to push it a little bit further out. Whenever there was a problem to be figured out I would always begin with what the current state of knowledge was - after all, we all stand on the shoulders of all those who have gone before. Quite often I found that the assumptions folks hold for a particular problem are the things that are holding them back from figuring out a new solution. So I would begin by questioning peoples basic assumptions on various subjects
“What if that wasn’t true ?"
"If it didn’t exist what could it be replaced with ?”
This usually resulted in annoying all of these knowledgable folks.
“That’s the way it’s always been”
“That’s the best industry standard for this”
“All the letters after my name means I’m right and you’re wrong”
“That’s what’s written in this book I’m holding”
“Everyone quotes from this person so he must be right - so I quote from him as well”
You get the idea. You see it on every single message board since the mid-nineties onwards. There’re also a lot of egotistical chips on folks shoulders where you’d find that they’d look down on others and belittle them on topics that they themselves had only just learned a few weeks earlier. This is particularly true in programming and crypto forums. Start A couple of guys worked with an online betting company. They had a problem. For punters to use their service they had to provide credit card details and pay for chip tokens. However, many times a punter would play the online pokey machines, lose all of their money and then reverse the credit card charge saying “It’s unauthorised. It wasn’t me”. Sometimes the company’s network would not record the funds transfer correctly and so the punters funds were removed from their credit account into the company’s account but no record of it was made on the company’s end - so the punter didn’t receive any play tokens and, again, tried to reverse the charges. The large credit card issuing companies also actively stopped allowing credit cards to be used for online gambling and began refusing to reverse the charges. What these guys needed was a way to transfer funds between punters and the online betting companies so that both parties could trust that everything was above board. That a payment could not be made by mistake and once a payment went through it was unchangeable, irreversible. (2) had been on the periphery of the cypherpunks group since the mid 1990’s. When I entered the project in early 2008 he had been working on the problem part-time over the past five years. Over the previous year or so he’d been working on the problem full-time. He was writing a white paper for an e-cash system for the online betting/gambling company to use ( or to license out the solution to multiple companies ) plus writing the code for it. He was attempting to implement a working example of electronic cash. There were other cryptographers who he was communicating with however it just wouldn’t “work”. There were always too many attack vectors with the solution and even though, from a cryptographic point-of-view, the white paper and code was appropriate, he found it unsatisfactory. After talking to his friend (3) it was decided that maybe they had their noses too close to the grindstone and that they should find someone who wasn’t a cryptographer to look over the ideas. The problem is that to find such a person is very difficult. He’d have to be smart enough to understand cryptography (or learn it), also be interested in the subject but also not currently be a cryptographer. Usually the folks who were smart enough and had an interest were already cryptographers. Through various IRC (Internet Relay Chat) channels (3) came across me and I ended up being put in touch with (2). With my work in the Win32 Asm community I’d shown I was smart enough and could figure out the solutions to difficult problems. Plus I’d made sure my public profile was always dealing with grey-to-white topics (no online gambling stuff). Request For Help I was asked to take a look over what had been written in the white paper and see what needed to be changed as the code implementing it just wasn’t working - the pieces wouldn’t fit together or the whole thing would fail if certain pre-conditions in the network weren’t met. (2) wanted to publish the white paper before the end of the year (2008). I began reading through the document - understanding very little. Hashing and encrypting and decrypting and private keys and public keys. Different types of hashing algorithms, encrypting then hashing and hashing then encrypting. Oh my! “Just tell me what I need to change to make it work” - (2) kept asking me. “I dunno what the [redacted] I’m reading here” - I replied. (2) thought that maybe he’d made a mistake and he’ll just try and find someone else. I told him that he’s going about fixing it the wrong way. “How should it be fixed ?”, he asked. “Well, first I need to know what I’m reading. So you’re going to have to give me info on the various crypto stuff in here”, I said. “No no no”, he said. “ If you learn the meaning of the cryptographic jargon you will be influenced by it and would no-longer be the “non-cryptographer” that we need to look over the white paper”. I told him that without learning the jargon I cannot read the paper in the first place. Also - as I learn I will understand more and will be able to tell you what you need to change. If or when it got to the stage that I’d learned too much and also had my nose too close to the grindstone then I could leave the project and he could find someone else to replace me. He agreed that having me learn a bit about cryptography may be a good idea (:roll-eyes:). He told me to get started. I asked where the information was. He said “Google it”. I said “Nope. You’ve been working in this area for the past few years so you can give me a link to the websites with the info." He returned with a list of website links and said to go through that and look at the white paper. The list had about 109 links in it - bloody [redacted]. One-by-one I began going through the information. After a few weeks I’d gone through about half-a-dozen papers/websites which hadn’t cleared up anything. Once three or four weeks had gone by I threw my hands up in disgust and told him “At this rate I’ll be here all year and still not understand all the pieces. You’ve got to filter this down for me. You’ve already read all of these documents and websites so give me a list of the most important docs/websites you think would be helpful in understanding your white paper”. He came back with a list of about 23 white papers and websites. “Now list them in the order you think I should read them in”. He came back with a sorted and filtered list of crypto-docs and websites. I began reading through them - starting at the first. Transactions Given a computer network there had to be transactions sent to a recipient. The initial white paper was pretty much a shuffling of the various cryptographic e-cash white papers at the time. We knew that when someone wanted to send a payment to another person it would have to be transmitted across a network securely. But how to solve the double-spend problem ? A piece of physical paper cash can only be in one place at a time - you cannot double-spend a physical currency note. All current electronic cash solutions relied upon a central server to control the allocation of coin and to make sure no coin could be double-spent. But if that server went down, or was unaccessible due to a DDOS attack or government intervention ( or someone just tripping over a power cord ) then no more money. We knew that a coin would initially be minted somehow. I found most of the methods written in white papers and on websites were rubbish ( Personal opinion here. No disrespect to those who wrote those white papers ). They either tried to pretend to act as central banks or tried to allow a “mates club” whereby they all agreed who's going to get coin at a particular time. Kind of like politicians using an "independent" third party to give themselves a pay rise. We knew that a piece of electronic cash would be minted somehow, however once it was minted how could it be sent to someone else ? (2) and I went back and forth with a few ideas, going through the physical process of different transaction types one by one and adjusting how a transaction data package would look like. We began with a single piece of e-cash. Like a piece of gold, it should be able to cut smaller pieces off of it. That means by starting with one item we’d end up with two - the piece going to the recipient and the change coming back to the original owner. I told (2) that when drawn into a diagram it looks like electronic or computer logic gates. Logic Gates Except sometimes there can be more outputs than inputs. And in the end it looks like a neural network. If we had a large piece and were paying that entire amount to someone then the input and output pieces would be the same. If we had a large piece and were paying a small amount to someone then the input would be the large piece and the outputs would be the amount being paid plus a small piece as change. As more people are paid we’d end up with a lot of small pieces in our wallet. If we had a small piece and needed to pay someone a large amount then we could combine multiple small pieces to be equal or larger than the amount to be paid, and refund back to ourselves any change left over. This means a transaction would have to allow multiple inputs and multiple outputs, with each input signed by the current owners private key and the outputs being the new owners public key. Transaction Types One day he came back to me saying his friend (3) wanted to communicate directly with me but he was a super-paranoid fella and I had to encrypt any messages using private/public keys. It was a [redacted] nightmare. I had to:
Generate the private/public keys
Make sure the public key was sent to a very specific location so that we could “trust” that the public key was valid
Use this quirky little command line proggy where I included my email address plus a link to the private key
Embed the generated data into the email
This was all so he could confirm that the message was indeed from me and had not been intercepted or changed. Then he decided that I’d also have to generate new private/public keys for every single email just in case a previous email had been intercepted. I told (2) that this just wasn’t going to happen. I’ve always disliked using command line programs directly and always thought that they should always be executed from a GUI ( Graphical User Interface). I said “You’re going to be my filter for this project and main conduit in this team. I send emails to you, you communicate with whoever you need to and send their replies back to me. Or you send their requests to me and I reply back through you. And what’s this annoying command line proggy anyway? What the [redacted] is it doing? (2) gave me the link to the information - it was in that list of 109 docs/websites but not in the filtered list of 23. It was to Hal's website where he very clearly explained how something called "Hashcash" worked. Hals RPOW From there I went on to Adam's site: Hashcash (which was not even in the original list at all). I read the Hashcash white paper sections until I hit the calculations and my eyes begun to glaze over. Hashcash I read the first few paragraphs and knew this was something interesting. I asked (2) if he could check whether this document was the final version or if there had been improvements/ amendments/ updates to it. He said he thought I was wasting my time with this and I should continue with the other docs/websites in the list he’d provided me. I told him that I’m the only one who would know what info is important and to look into the Hashcash origin for me. He came back a couple of days later and said it was confirmed that the public document linked was the final version of the Hashcash paper. I asked how he could confirm it? He told me that he’d contacted the original website author Hal and asked him for any updated document and Hal had replied back with the exact same public link. He’d even copy/pasted Hal’s reply in the email to me. I said “Wait… What ? …” “You actually contacted the original author of the reference material ?” He said “Yep. Who else would I go to to confirm the document, except to the author themselves ?” I told him it was really quite rare to have someone check with the original author or sources. Most folks read something and take that as fact, or read the reference documents and take those as fact. If someone read about the Boyer-Moore search algorithm they take it as fact that what they’ve read is the official final solution. I haven’t heard of anyone contacting Boyer or Moore to check for any updates/ improvements/ amendments. The Boyer-Moore search algorithm is something that went through the rounds on the Win32Asm community forum for a while. I found this quite intriguing. Even with (2)’s occasional grating personality it would be very useful to have someone who’s prepared to hunt down the original authors like this. I asked him if he'd contacted the Hashcash author and he said he'd sent emails to every single author of all of the websites/ white papers and only about a dozen or so had ever replied back to him. I had begun to write up a list of what the various problems were for creating an e-cash system from the other e-cash system white papers and websites I had been studying. I was still referring back to the white paper (2) had supplied me however it was really just a mishmash of what everyone else had been doing over the years. Hence why it failed like all of the others. One of the problems was a trusted time stamp so that folks would know that funds hadn’t been double-spent. Another was the minting of the tokens in the system and trusting the minting source. If I recall - practically every single white paper out there ( including the one suppled to me ) used a trusted third party as the source for a time stamp and a convoluted method to check it hadn’t been tampered with. And the minting either used a trusted third party to generate coins on a regular basis or had a network of nodes agree on how many tokens to generate and give to each other. (2) said that we need to use the trusted third parties because how else can we trust the time stamp and the minting of the tokens. I told him he was thinking of it in the wrong way. You’re assuming a trusted third party is needed, just because every single other cryptographic white paper says that’s how you do it. But you’re also saying that you can’t rely on a trusted third party because that makes a single point attack vector that can bring the whole system down to its knees. “Remember Sherlock Holmes” I said. “ ‘When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth ?’. The assumption of a trusted third party in an functioning e-cash system must be eliminated as impossible for this to work. So if we cannot have a trusted third party for this, what are our other options ?” “I have no idea”, (2) replied. “Do you believe this proof-of-work thing you’re looking into can be used for this somehow ?”. “I dunno. It definitely has some possibilities. It’s made for making sure the data being sent and received comes from a known trusted source and that it hasn’t been tampered with”. It forces the user computer to generate a hash of the data to find a hash with a prepended number of zeroes. If the hash isn’t found it increments a value and hashes again. It just keeps repeating until a hash is found with the correct number of prepended zeroes. This means that the user computer has to spend time working on the hashes until it finds one and only then can it stop. It was designed to eliminate the email spam problem that we all have because a spam-sender would need to use a lot of computing resources to generate hashes for all the emails sent out ( the data that’s hashed includes the recipients email address so a new hash is required for every single email recipient ). It also has a throttle so that the difficulty in generating a hash can be increased over time as the general computing hardware improves. The minting problem is also sorted due to the electricity used in generating a hash can be used to mint the e-cash and put it into circulation. Effectively - the real fiat-currency cost (via electricity consumed) of generating the valid hash is how much e-cash is given to that minter. It also sets what the price of the minted e-cash should be, as there is a direct correlation between a real-world electricity bill and the digital e-cash amount minted. Taking the time used to generate the hash with how much energy the cpu used during the generation ( only the time spent on hashing - not other computing resources ) with the local electricity costs of the suburb/county/province/state/nation the minter resides within, then each minter could have a locally-adjusted e-cash value added to their account. It would mean that someone minting in a country with cheap electricity due to state-subsidised support would receive less e-cash because less real-world fiat currency was expended in the generation of the hash. So now we had a mechanism in which this e-cash would work. I'll stop this story here for now and post a follow-up depending upon its reception. The follow-up will contain some of the details of how the idea of a chain of blocks came about, plus some of the tech that was left out of the initial white paper and public code release ( it was, after all, just the first experiment to check whether this tech would actually work ). Bitcoin Origins - part 2 As a side-note: When you read the Bitcoin white paper again, the Introduction, Calculation, Conclusion and References sections were written and edited by (2) and (3). The Transactions, Timestamp Server, Proof-of-Work, Network, Incentive, Reclaiming Disk Space, Simplified Payment Verification, Combining and Splitting Value and Privacy sections were from text copy/ pasted from emails from me to (2) explaining how each part worked as they were being figured out. I wrote the Abstract text when (2) asked me to write the Introduction. (2) used it as the Abstract section because he found it too terse for an introduction. (2) and (3) edited the entire document and removed any double-spaces from it, adding titles to the various sections and adjusting between 2% and 5% for spelling errors and gramma sentence structure. You can see the original Abstract with double-spacing here: Public Mailing-list Posting There was a huge misunderstanding between us all during the formation of the white paper which I'll mention next time. Cheers, Phil (Scronty) vu.hn
BTC vs. BCH: Throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Photo The Bitcoin Core developers as well as the Bitcoin Cash team have good intentions. Both want to support the crypto revolution and make sure that all 7 billion people will be able to benefit from sound money. Bitcoin Core developers think that it will not be possible to scale bitcoin to that level on-chain without diverting most traffic to second layer off-chain solutions. But by doing that bitcoin stops being a pure P2P transaction system, because again 3rd parties, who control the 2nd layers, are introduced. You will need someones cooperation, someones permission to use 2nd layer channels and in fact existing banks with their already existing client base have good reasons to open and run 2nd layer channels in order to make use of the many advantages of blockchains and bitcoin for their clients. By compromising the P2P quality of transaction they "throw the baby out together with the bathwater. Bitcoin Cash proponents think that by allowing much bigger blocks, scaling can go a long way without comptomising P2P txs. They DO NOT oppose 2nd layer solutions, but reserve them for special applications in consideration of not diverting / blocking access of individuals (as opposed to institutions) to direct anonymous P2P communication. So both camps have good intentions and the current war, the big conflict of opinion is basically a political one. How important is freedom and independence from middlemen? This is just my reasoning after listening to Dr. Julian Host of TenX COMIT, Singapur (in German) about future developments to allow easy transaction between fiat and all cryptos.
Afternoon, All. This is a continuation from the previous reddit post: Bitcoin Origins The following are a few notes I've been making on the original development of the tech behind Bitcoin. This is still in early draft form so expect the layout and flow to be cleaned up over time. Also be aware that the initial release of the Bitcoin white paper and code was what we had cut down to from earlier ideas. This means that some of the ideas below will not correspond to what would end up being made public. As I'm paraphrasing dim memories some of the sections are out-of-order whereby some things occurred earlier rather than later. As I recall more I'll be updating this story elsewhere for uploading when it appears more substantial. As noted on the first post ( link supplied above ): There is no verification of truth here. There is absolutely no evidential proof that I had any part in the project. Take this as just a fictional story if you wish. Bitcoin Logo BitCoin Origins Six Months In A Leaky Boat continued ... “You’re saying that we can use this proof-of-work thing to inject electronic cash into the network and have it tied to fiat currencies, but how would the network know what the local fiat currency is to figure out the correct fiat-currency-to-electronic-cash exchange rate ?”, (2) asked. “Maybe we could have a server that keeps a record of what the various electricity companies charge and have the software get the values from there ?”, I suggested. “Some of these new mobile phones, the smart phones, the cellular network phones in folks pockets, have GPS chips incorporated into them, right ? And everyone has them or will be getting them as they become more popular. This means everyone will have a device on them which will allow the software to include a GPS location so that the network knows which exchange rate to use for that particular minted cash. “But how will the network know that the GPS coordinates haven’t been changed and set to another location ?”, (2) asked. “Wouldn’t that mean relying on a trusted third party again ? I thought you said we have to get away from that ? If we cannot trust a single computer for minting cash into the network then maybe we shouldn’t trust any at all ?” “Uhh… dunno,” I replied. “I’ll get back to that later”, I said. “Ok, ” (2) said. “How are we going to have the transactions sent to other people on the network ? All the other white papers are expecting people to connect directly to one of the trusted computers to purchase the electronic cash and to transfer it to someone else through them. If we’re not going to use a trusted computer for this and will have the proof-of-work generate the cash, then how do people receive or pay the cash ? Also: How would the network trust that the cash is valid if no computer is being used for time-stamping and validating the cash ?” I told him I’d have to think about it. Multiple ideas were given and discarded. He consulted with (3) about every possible solution and every one was a failure. They either resulted in having to rely on at least one server to hook everything together or would break if multiple transaction messages were sent at the same time to different computers. After a week or so of this I’d finally burnt myself out and decided that it’s quite possible that everyone else was correct when they said that you couldn’t solve double-spending in a digital world without depending upon a trusted third party. I stopped emailing (2) at that point, hoping it’d all go away. After a week he emailed me asking if I’d come up with another solution for testing. I told him that I don’t think there is a solution and maybe he should just use part of what he had in his original white paper and rely on a trusted third party like everyone else. He said something along the lines of “Like [redacted] I will ! You’ve taken me down this path of not trusting a single computer and that’s what I want. No-one's done that before and if we break it, it will probably change everything ! ” I told him I’m taking a break from it all for a while. Another week passes and he emails me again. He said, “How are you feeling ? Sorry to be so harsh on you but I really need this to work. I’ll leave you be if that’s what you want. Just let me know when you’re able to continue.” Another week goes by and whenever I begin to think of the problem I just say to myself “To [redacted] with him and his electronic cash problem.” For comfort I turn to perusing through some of my old Win32 Asm proggys (I called them “proggys” because I thought of them as small, incomplete computer programs - kind of like examples and tutorials). I also begun reminiscing about the Amiga 500 days and the proggys I made back then (late 1980’s through to mid 1990’s). Knowing that one of the most difficult issues with electronic cash revolved around the networking architecture and how data would be propagated by the networked computers I began going through some of the discussions I had back in 2005 and 2006 with someone who was attempting to make a tank game. I explained to him the main difference between TCP and UDP ( Transmission Control ProtocolUser Datagram Protocol ). If you need data packages to arrive in a particular order with confirmation that they’ve arrived then you’d use TCP. If you need velocity of data packets you can throw all the protocol error checking out and use UDP. That’s one of the reasons great online multi-player games uses UDP. It reduces the latency with the data being transmitted around the network. The main difficulty is in building the gaming system in such a way so that the data the servers and clients transmit and receive work when data packets never arrive. TCP guarantees delivery if the network is functioning while with UDP you do not know if a particular packet ever arrived or if packets arrived in a different order to transmission due to separate packets traversing the internet via different pathways. Many online games were usually built for single-player first and the multi-player code would be chucked into the codebase near the end of development. This would mean that all of the game code objects and classes were made to use known values at any particular time and could not work in a UDP environment without re-architecting the entire code base from scratch. You’d find many of the games that also included multi-player gameplay options ended up using TCP for the network communications and this made all of these games slow over the network with high latency and unplayable lag as the gameplay would be faster than the network data packets telling your computer where your opponents are located. The various tanks games around 2005 were built as above. I convinced this person to focus on the multi-player aspect of the game because he could always add in single-player later on. Multiple players would have to drive and fire tanks around a field while being updated continuously about the complete state of the network. This is usually accomplished by having a single server that receives all of the current data from all the player clients and dishes out the official game state back to all of those player clients so that everyone knows who went where, who fired at what and who has been hit. However even with using UDP there is a bottleneck in the network with the server itself only being able to process a peak number of connections and data throughput every second. It could only scale so high. We had talked about different ways to improve this by possibly having relay servers on some of the players computers or having a more peer-to-peer like structure so that each player client only had to get the latest data from its nearest neighbours in the network and only transmit to their peers so that a fully server-less multi-player game could be created. How the data could be moved about without someone creating a hack that could change the data packages in their favour couldn’t be figured out. In the end he went with using a central server with both TCP and UDP depending upon what data packages were needed to be sent - general gameplay data (tank movements) via UDP and server state (for confirming who hit what) via TCP. If a peer-to-peer network was to be used for electronic cash then to be scalable the data packages must be able to be transmitted with as high a velocity as possible. It must work with the majority of transmissions using UDP. If two-way communication is required then a return ip/port can be included within a UDP data package or a TCP connection could be used. I had also read and reread this thing that has been going around the crypto community for ages called the Byzantine Generals Dilemma (or worded in a similar way). It’s supposed to be impossible to solve and at least a couple of well-known academics and crypto folks had “proven” it was impossible to solve only a few years previously. They had pretty much staked their reputations on the fact that it was unsolvable. I thought “Wouldn’t it be absolutely hilarious if the solution to this double-spending problem is also the solution to the impossible Byzantine Generals Dilemma and could be found using ideas from the Amiga days and 3D programming and uses multi-player gaming techniques ? That would annoy the [redacted] out of the crypto community and take those elitists down a peg or two !” (This is where you’d see the screen go all watery-wavy as the scene morphs to a time in the past when I was a moderator of the Win32 Asm community) The assembly community and the crypto community share a lot in common. They’re made up of some of the most brilliant folks in the computing industry where huge egos do battle against one-another. You’d also find folks in one community existing within the other. Both communities are made up of both light and dark actors. The light actors are those who are very public. They are academics, researchers, security professionals, and so on. The dark actors are … (and that’s all I’ll say about them). Except to say that the light crypto actors are usually doing work to undo what the dark assembly actors are doing. It’s one [redacted] of a game ! To have a message board that was able to accommodate all actors required a few tough rules and stiff execution of them if the forum was to continue to exist. Many of the other assembly boards were being snuffed out by government actors forcing the hosting service to shut them down. This was mainly due to the assembly forums insistence of allowing threads to exist which showed exactly how to break and crack various websites/ networks/ software/ etc. Whenever one of these sites were shut down the members would disperse to the various remaining assembly boards. So we received an influx of new members every few months whenever their previous venue went up in smoke. However they never learned from the experience ( or, at least, some of them never learned ) and they would continue to openly chat about dark subjects on our board, which put our board in danger as well. The moderators had to be strong but fair against these new-comers, especially knowing that they (the moderators) could be actively attacked (digitally) at any time. Occasionally one of these new members would decide to DDOS ( Distributed Denial Of Service ) us, however they apparently forgot what message board they were attempting to DDOS, and it always ended very badly for them. We would also occasionally get someone with quite a bit of knowledge in various subjects - some of it very rare and hard-to-come-by. It would be terrible if that member left and took their knowledge with them. They would complain that there were too many noobs asking questions on the message board and it would be better if there was a higher level of knowledge and experience needed before the noobs could enter the message board or post a question. Once I told one of these members, “Ok then. Let’s say that thing you’ve been talking about for the past two weeks, and calling everyone else a noob for not understanding it, is the knowledge limit. I know that you only first read about it two and a half weeks ago. Let’s say I make that the limit and predate it three weeks ago and kick your butt out of this community ?" “That’s not very fair”, he protested. I told him, “None of us know where the next genius is coming from. The main members of this community, the ones that input more than everyone else, have come from incredibly varied environments. Some with only a few weeks knowledge are adding more to the community every week compared to members who have been with us for years. One of the members you’ve dissed in the past couple of weeks could in turn create the next piece of software that all of us use. We don’t know that. What we need to do is have a community that is absolutely inclusive for every single person on the planet no matter where they’ve come from, what their wealth is, what their nation state does, and to keep our elitism in check.” “Ok, fair enough, I’m sorry, please don’t kick me out.” was the usual result. These were very intelligent folks, however they had to be reminded that we are a single species moving through time and space together as one. (This is where you’d see the screen go all watery-wavy as the scene morphs back to me figuring out this double-spending problem) As you may tell, I don’t tolerate elitist attitudes very well. Which also helped when I turned towards the elitist attitudes I read in some of these academic papers and crypto white papers ( some of which were more like notes than white papers ) and messages on the crypto forums and mailing lists. “ ‘It’s impossible to solve the Byzantine Generals Problem’ they say ? Let’s see about that !” Byzantine General’s Dilemma The problem is written a little bit differently depending upon where you read it. An occasional academic may be more well-read than others and becomes the “official” wording used by many others. I’ll paraphrase it a wee bit just so you get a general idea of the problem (pun intended). We go back to the time of the city-states. This is before the notion of sovereign states - there’s just a bunch of individual city-states that control the surrounding nearby country side. Every so often a bunch of these city-states would get together and form something called an empire. Alliances would change and friends would become enemies and enemies friends on a month-to-month and year-to-year basis. To expand the empire the bunch of city-states would send armies controlled by generals to take over an adjacent city-state. These city-states are huge (for their time) walled cities with armies in strong fortifications. Let’s say there are six generals from six empire city-states that surround an adjacent city-state - all generals and their armies are equidistant from each other. They cannot trust one another because at any moment one of them may become an enemy. Or they could be an enemy pretending to be a friend. Due to the defensive forces of the defending city-state, the six generals know that they could take the city if every one of them attacked at the same time from around the city. But if only a few attacked and the others retreated then the attackers would be wiped out and the surviving city-states, with their generals and their armies intact, would end up over-powering and enslaving their previous friendly city-states. No-one could trust any other. (This has massive parallels with modern day sovereign nations and their playing of the game with weapons, armies/air forces/navies, economics, currency, trade agreements, banks, education, health, wealth, and so on) The generals have to send a message to the other generals telling them if they’re going to attack or retreat. The problem is that a general could send a message to the general to his left saying that he’ll attack and send a second message to the general to his right that he will retreat. Some possible solutions said that there should be two lieutenants to receive the message from the general and that they could check each others message to confirm that they are indeed identical before passing the messages onto the left and right messengers. However the messengers in turn could change the message from “attack” to “retreat” or vice versa or not deliver the message at all. Plus the generals, once a message has been sent out as “attack” could turn around and retreat, or vice versa. I thought to myself, “I bet the folks who thought up this problem are feeling pretty damn smug about themselves.” However I was a moderator of an assembly community. I’d translated the DirectX8 C++ COM headers into their x86 assembly equivalent (using techniques built by others far more smarter than me, and with help for some files when DX8.1 was translated), built a PIC micro controller assembler in x86 assembly language, and many other things. And because I've done six impossible things this morning, why not round it off with creating a solution to the Byzantine Generals Dilemma ! Elitist ego ? What elitist ego ? They’re all amateurs ! Let us begin: “Ok,” I thought to myself. “let’s start at the beginning. We need a network. What does that look like ?” The Generals are going to be represented as computers. The servers in the network. The nodes. The messages are going to be the data travelling between them. Transactions will be used as the first example of data. For those reading, hold your hands in front of you - touch the bottom of the palms together with the fingers far apart, thumbs touching each other, twist your elbow and wrists so that the fingers are pointing upwards - slightly curved. Fingers as Nodes These are the nodes in the network. The node where the thumbs touch is your own node. No node can trust each other. For this network structure to work, it must work even with every single node actively hostile toward one another. “Surely the network can trust my node. I’m good ! “, you may say to yourself. But you would be wrong. This network is not about you. It must exist even when you don’t. If there were a hundred nodes then it’d be ninety-nine to one against you. As far as the network is concerned, there’s ninety-nine nodes that cannot trust you compared to your one. So accepting that all nodes cannot trust one another, plus they are actively hostile toward one another, we can … “But hang on ! ”, you say. “What do you mean ‘actively hostile’ ? Surely they’re not all hostile ? ” Even if most of the time nodes will play nice with one another, the rules of the game must be structured in such a way that they will work even if all participants were actively hostile toward one another . Because if it still worked with everyone having a go at each other then you would’ve built something that could last for a very long time. You could build something whereby sovereign nations could no-longer undermine other sovereign nations. It would be the great equaliser that would allow stronger nations to stop screwing around with weaker nations. It’s the ultimate golf handicapping system. Everyone could play this game. Kind of like my moderating style from the assembly days. So we have these hostile nodes. It has to be able to work with any type of message or data package. Initially it will be built for electronic cash transactions. I will type it as "messages (transactions)" below to indicate that the messages are the messages in the Byzantine Generals Dilemma and that the message could be any data whatsoever - "transactions" just being the first. Plus in a roundabout way a message is also a transaction whereby a transaction doesn't have to be only for electronic cash - it's just an indication of what items are being transacted. We want to send messages (transactions) between them and make sure everyone agrees that the messages (transactions) are correct. That implies that every single node would have to store an exact copy of all the messages (transactions) and be able to read through them and confirm that they are valid. And whenever a node receives a message (transaction) it would check it for validity and if it’s ok then that message (transaction) would be passed onto the adjacent nodes. But how to stop a node changing the message (transaction) contents and sending different results to two adjacent nodes ? How about taking the possibility of messages (transactions) being able to be changed out of the problem completely ? We could using private/public keys to sign the messages (transactions) so that they couldn’t be changed. The owner could sign a message (transaction) with the owners private key and everyone could check its validity with the owners public key, but not be able to change it. Right. The messaging ( transactions/ data/ etc ) part of the problem is partially solved. Now how do I solve the generals problem so that they all play nicely with one another ? If we can make sure all generals (nodes) can get the identical data and that they can all validate that the data is identical and unchanged then the Byzantine Generals Dilemma would be solved. Data Chunks It became apparent that every major node on a network would have to store an entire copy of all of the data so that they could verify that the data was correct and hadn’t been modified. The data would probably end up looking like a list or stack, with each incoming valid message (transaction) placed on top of the previous messages (transactions). What looks like a stack but hasn’t got the memory restrictions like a normal assembly stack ? When I was reminiscing about the Amiga 500 days I recalled having to muck about with IFF. That’s the Interchange File Format. The basics of it is like this: In a plain text file there are chunks of data. Each chunk of data begins with a chunk identifier - four characters that indicate to a program what type of data resides within that chunk (example “WAVE”, “FORM”, “NAME”). An IFF file can have many data chunks of differing types. The .AVI (audio/video), .ILBM (bitmap) and .WAV (audio wave) file formats are based upon the IFF. I thought, “What if one of these data chunks was called ‘MSG ’, ‘DATA’ or ‘TSTN’ (TranSacTioN) ? ” That might work. Where would the proof-of-work thing come into play ? Let’s say we replace the four-character-identifier with a header so that the proof-of-work can be done on it ? That means the header would now include an identifier for what type of data is included within the chunk, plus a value used to modify the difficulty for generating a hash (the number of zeros needed to prepend the generated hash), a random value which increments as hashes are attempted so that the header data is slightly different for each hash attempt, plus the data itself. But once a correct hash is generated, that particular node would mint electronic cash to pay for the electricity used. Remember: The electronic cash is supposed to cover the actual fiat currency costs involved in doing the proof-of-work computations. As the owner of the node computer is paid by an employer in fiat currency and has paid personal tax on it, and they have used that fiat currency to pay their electricity provider (which in turn pays company, state and value-added or goods&service taxes), then the electronic cash is equivalent to swapping your own money for a soft drink can from a vending machine. Except, due to the media of this system, you’d be able to go to another vending machine and reenter your soft drink can for a refund in fiat currency again ( minus a restocking fee ) and the vending machine could be anywhere on the planet. That means an extra message (transaction) would have to be included within the chunks data for the minted electronic cash. If there must be at least two messages (transactions) within a data chunk - the actual message (transaction) plus the message (transaction) for the node that generates the hash - then maybe there could be more messages (transactions) stored in each data chunk ? How would a bunch of messages (transactions) be stored inside a data chunk ? I remembered learning about binary space partitioning around 2006. BSP trees were used to store 3D graphic polygons that were able to be quickly traversed so that a game could decide which scenery to display to the game player. Quake 3 Arena and Medal of Honour: Allied Assault ( which uses Q3A codebase) used BSP trees for storing the scenery. Wherever the player was looking the tree would be traversed and only the polygons (triangles) that were viewable would be rendered by the graphics chip. Try to think of the players view in a game was like a searchlight beam and whatever the light touches is rendered onto a persons computer screen and everything else is ignored- unseen and not rendered. “I wonder if I could break the transactions up into a binary space partitioned tree ?” For those interested, a wee bit of light reading is here: Binary Space Partitioning A binary space partitioned tree begins at one polygon and uses its surface as a plane to cut throughout the rest of the scene. This kind of plane: Geometry Plane Each polygon the plane hits gets sliced in two. Note: The ‘node’ word used below is used for talking about the nodes in a BSP tree - not nodes in a computer network. Think of nodes as where an actual tree branch splits into two smaller branches. All the polygons in front of the plane go into the left branch (node) and all the polygons behind the plane go into the right branch (node). Traversing each branch (node) in turn, a polygon is chosen closest to the middle of the remaining branch (node) scenery and another plane slices the branch (node) in two. The traversal continues until the entire scenery has been sliced up into left/ right (or up/ down) branches (nodes) and they all end up at the leaves (nodes) which store the actual polygon geometry. If we use the messages (transactions) as the equivalent of the polygon geometry then we could have a bunch of messages (transactions) in the leaf nodes at the bottom of a tree-like structure inside a data chunk. Instead of a group of triangle vertices ( polygon geometry ) there would be a single message (transaction). But how to connect them all up ? A BSP tree is linked up by having a parent node pointing to the two child nodes, but that’s in memory. The BSP file that’s stored on a disc drive can be easily modified ( easy as in it’s possible instead of impossible ). The messages (transactions) within a chunk cannot be allowed to be changed. What if, instead of memory pointers or offsets pointing parents to children we use one of those crypto hashing functions ? The bottom-most leaf nodes could use data specifically from their message (transaction) to generate a node hash, right ? Parent Branch nodes could create a hash using the hashes of their two children hashes. This would create a tree-like structure within a data chunk where the topmost parent hash could be included within the data chunks proof-of-work header. This would allow all the messages (transactions) to be locked into a tree that doesn’t allow them to be modified because all parent node hashes would have to be recalculated and the trees root hash would be different from the original generated hash. And that would mean that the entire proof-of-work hash value would be changed. The same mechanism used to transfer the transaction data around the network would also be used to send the chunks of data. If a network node received a changed dataChunk and compared it with one they already held then they’d notice the proof-of-work is different and would know someone was attempting to modify the data. Bloody [redacted] ! I think this might actually work. I email (2) to inform him that I was again making progress on the issue. I explained the idea of having a simplified BSP tree to store the messages (transactions) into a dataChunk and have them all hashed together into a tree with the proof-of-work plus parent hash at the top. He said, “If I change the transaction stuff to use this method I’m going to have to throw out half my white paper and a third of my code”. “Well, “ I replied. “You can keep using your current transaction stuff if you want. It can never work in a no-trust environment but if that makes you happy then stay with it. For me - I’m going to take the red pill and continue down this path and see where it gets me. I’m also working on solving the Byzantine Generals Dilemma.” “Ok. ok”, he said. “I’ll go with what you’ve come up with. But what are you stuffing about with the Byzantine problem ? It’s an impossible crypto puzzle and has nothing to do with electronic cash.” “It has everything to do with an actual working electronic cash system”, I said. “If it can be solved then we could use a peer-to-peer network for transferring all the data about the place ! Kinda like Napster.” “Didn’t Napster get shut down because it used a central server ?”, (2) retorted. “What’s another peer-to-peer network ? IRC ? Tor ?, BitTorrent ?” “I think we can use IRC to hold the initial node addresses until such time the network is big enough for large permanent nodes to appear”, (2) suggested. (2) asked, “What’s to stop nodes from sending different dataChunks to other nodes ? If they’re just stacked on top of one-another then they can be swapped in and out at any time. That’s why a third party server is needed for setting the official time on the network for the transactions. Someone could create different transactions and change the time to whatever they want if they can use whatever time they choose.” I said I’ll think on it some more. A Kronos Stamp Server If a third party cannot be used for a time stamp server then we’d have to reevaluate what is meant by time in a computer network. What if how people think about time is actually wrong and everyone is assuming it to be something that it really isn’t ? If you hold one fist in front of you to represent time - call it ‘now’ time. Now Time If you hold another fist after the first fist you can call it ‘after now’ time. After Now Time If you hold another fist before the first fist you can call it ‘before now’ time. Before Now Time What we’re actually looking at is a chronological order stamp. The actual time itself is pretty much irrelevant except for when comparing two things in their chronological order. It should work whether the ‘now’ time is the time shown on your clock/watch right now, or on a date two hundred years from now, or 1253BC ( Tuesday ). The before/ now/ after can be adjusted accordingly: after ( Wednesday ) now ( 1253BC Tuesday ) before ( Monday ) And if the time value used is the time shown on your clock, is it the same as the time value shown on your watch ? On the microwave ? DVD player ? Computer ? Phone ? You may find that all the time pieces inside your own home vary by a few seconds or even a few minutes ! In an office almost every single person has a timepiece that has a different time to everyone else - even if it’s only different by a few milliseconds. Does that mean as you walk from your kitchen ( showing 2:02pm on the wall ) into the lounge ( showing 2:01 on the DVD player ) that’s you’ve just entered a time portal and been magically transported back in time by a minute ? Of course not. They’re all equally valid time values that humans have made up to be roughly synchronised with one-another. All that really matters is the range of valid time values used to indicate “This is Now”, “This is Next” or “This was Before”. If the network nodes all agree on what range of time values should be valid to be “now” or “near now” then each node could use its own time value in any data messages (transactions or dataChunks) and no third party timestamp server would be required. I email (2) and let him know the time-stamp server issue has been resolved by having the nodes use a Kronos-Stamp. “What the [redacted] is a ‘Kronos-Stamp’ ? ”, (2) asked. I give him the explanation I gave to you ( the Reader ) above. “But what’s this ‘Kronos’ word mean ?”, (2) asked. “It’s short for “Chronological Order. It’s a Chronological Order Stamp. We don’t need a Time-Stamp any more,” I replied. “But what’s with the ‘K’ ?” “To annoy all those folks who’d rather get furious about misspelt words than try and understand the concept that’s being explained. ” “Well, the crypto community won’t like it spelt like that. We’re going to have to call it a Time-Stamp server because that’s what they understand,” (2) said. I said, “Time-Stamps are for systems using third party servers. Chronological Order Stamps are for peer-to-peer networks.” “Ok,” (2) said. “We can use this time thing for making sure the dataChunks are in a chronological order but what stops someone from just changing the time of their computer to be a little earlier than someone else and having their version of the data accepted by everyone else?” I said I’ll think on it some more. A Chain of Data Chunks On another project I was rereading some information about rendering graphical data. In 3D graphics triangles are used to create any object you see onscreen. Example of Triangle types: Triangle Types Each numbered dot represents a vertex. The data for the vertices are placed into arrays called buffers. They’re just a long list of data points which are loaded onto a graphics card and told to be drawn. Triangle Strip A triangle strip is a strip of triangles which share the data points from the previous triangle. Each triangle in the strip is drawn alternating between clockwise/counter-clockwise (indicated by the red and green arrows) The very first triangle must have all of its vertices added (all three vertices 1,2,3) Every other triangle in the strip only has to add one more single vertex and reuse the previous two vertices. The second triangle just adds the data for the vertex (4) and reuses vertices 2 and 3 that’s already embedded inside the strip. This makes the strip incredibly compact in size for the data it’s meant to represent plus locks each triangle inside the strip and they cannot be accidentally used elsewhere. If a triangle was wanted to be drawn in a different order then an entirely new triangle strip would have to be created. A key side affect is that a triangle strip can be set to start drawing at any vertices (except vertices 2 and 3) and the entire strip from that data point onwards will be drawn. I was staring at this for a long time thinking “This could be used for the electronic cash project somehow, but how exactly ?” I kept going through the explanation for the triangle strip again and again trying to understand what I was seeing. Then it dawned on me. The triangles were the data in a triangle strip. The chunks were the data in the electronic cash project. If the triangles were actually the dataChunks then that means the vertices were the proof-of-work header, with the embedded root hash for the messages/ transactions. The lines in the triangle strip represented the reuse of previous vertex data. So that means I could reuse the proof-of-work hash from a previous dataChunk and embed that into the next proof-of-work as well ! And just like a triangle strip the dataChunks couldn’t be moved elsewhere unless all the surrounding proof-of-work hashes were redone again. It reinforces the Kronos Stamp by embedding the previous proof-of-work hash into it so we know what came before now and what was next after previous. If the entire network was using their cpu power to generate these proof-of-work hashes then a hostile actor would need half the processing power to get a fifty percent chance of generating the proof-of-work hash for a block and modifying the data. However every second block on average would be generated by an opposing hostile actor and so whatever the fifty percent hostile actor was attempting to do wouldn’t last for very long. DataChunk Chain I needed to have some of the math for this looked at to see if I was on the right track. I email (2) and let him know about this idea of hooking together the dataChunks like a chain so that they couldn’t be modified without redoing the proof-of-work hashing. He liked the idea of a chain. I said, “You see how all the appended dataChunk headers reuse the hash from the previous dataChunk header ? Take a look at the very first dataChunk.” “What’s so special about that” , (2) asks. “Well,” I say. “The first dataChunk header hasn’t got any previous hashes it can use, so in the beginning it will have to use a made up ‘previous hash’ in its header. In the beginning it has to use a manually create hash. In the beginning… get it?” “What ?”, (2) asks. “The very first data chunk is the Genesis dataChunk. In the beginning there is the Genesis dataChunk”, I reply. He said he likes that idea very much as he’d just started being involved in a church in the past year or so. I ask him to get the other cryptos he’s in contact with to play around with the numbers and see if this would work. (2) asked, “Hang on. How would this solve the double-spending problem ?” I'll stop this story here for now and post a follow-up depending upon its reception. I guess I've found reddit's posting character limit. 40,000 characters. There was going to be another 10,000 characters in this post however that will have to wait till next time. Bitcoin Origins - part 3 This is a continuation from the previous reddit post: Bitcoin Origins Cheers, Phil (Scronty) vu.hn
The Strange but Edifying Cautionary & Mostly True Tale of John DEE & Edward KELLEY, and Their Epic Quest for Wisdom Gold & Ultimately Females
In a recent comment I mentioned this interesting story that I read a few years ago, while poking around the Voynich Manuscript. I thought that it was worth retelling here, for I believe that it offers some insight and maybe guidance in these troubled (albeit eminently comical) times. The story is as true as a tale of lies and deceptions can be: it is based mainly on the diary kept by Dee, with contributions from some other sources, including a report of his "Conversations" with Angels, that was found by chance in the false bottom of a chest, some years after his death. ∞ ∞ ∞ ● ∞ ∞ ∞ While not quite a genius, Gavin John Dee (1527 – 1608) was a fairly competent English mathematician and generic "philosopher". (His surname, by the way, is of Welsh origin -- ahem!) A graduate of Cambridge, in his youth he traveled through Europe, worked for SGI and even lectured at the University of Paris. He was for a time tutor of young Princess Elizabeth. By that time he got interested in what would become the bane of his life, Bitcoin the Occult. That passion quickly got him into serious trouble, as he was charged with "programming" "calculating", then treason, then heresy. But he managed to clear himself of all charges, and retired to a home in Mortlake, a suburb of London. At Mortlake he assembled a large collection of books, heraldic emblems, and other items. Elizabeth once paid him a friendly visit, when she was 17, as he recorded in his diary. He continued to pursue his occult studies at Mortlake, including the new science of cryptography cryptography, and "mining" "scrying", a technique for person-to-person payments person-to-spirit communication, that was fashonable among cypherpunks occultists at the time, using a blockchain crystal ball. To Dee's frustration, he was never able to solve a block see anything in the device, no matter how much he prayed and tried, in all his life. But in 1582 Dee eventually met Edward Wright Kelley, a young man who claimed to be able to use the ball to sign messages see and communicate with "Angels" who were willing to teach him and Dee all sorts of wonderful stuff. Kelley was then using the pseudonym of Nakamoto Talbot, perhaps to hide his past shenanigans. He had been caught forging documents from SGI or maybe company expenditures coins in Lancaster, Australia, had been investigated by the Tax Office pilloried there, and had his ears cropped. Kelley took permanent residence at Mortlake, where he and Dee held many long scrying sessions using a laptop provided by Kelley. Dee kept detailed records of everything that the Angels supposedly told Kelly, such as intricated cabalistic diagrams, tonal arithmetic, instructions to make a symbol-covered wooden table for divination, and elements of the Angels' own "Enochian" language. Dee was particularly anxious to get their help in deciphering some mysterious tables from a whitepaper book on magic that the owned, the Book of Soyga. The Angels told Dee (through Kelley) to be patient, for he would have their secret revealed once SegWit in due time . Dee also asked whether he would one day be able to see the Angels himself. According to Kelley, the Angels assumed the form of females beautiful women, not encumbered by material trifles like clothing. The Angels again told Dee that he would be able to, when he would be ready for it. For the next five years, Dee apparently believed piously everything that Kelley told him. About a year after their meeting, Kelly revealed that he had valuable proprietary software an alchemical Book of Dunstan and a supercomputer vial of red powder that he could use to turn tax incentives into fat profits base metals into gold . He supposedly had dug them from Northwick hill in the Seychelles Bristol area. He demonstrated the powder several times, including in a YouTube video to some high-ranking members Court in London. In the latter demo, he removed a signature bit of copper from a block mined in 2009 bed-warming pan, turned it into gold with his "tincture", and showed that it still fit perfectly where it had been removed from. Then in late 1583 the two men and their families suddenly left England for the Continent, without even arranging for care of the Mortlake residence. Perhaps they were lured by the rich opportunites promised by Andreas Albert Łaski, a Polish Prince who was visiting England and was himself interested in alchemy. Perhaps Dee became worried that Kelley's creative accounting summoning of "Angels" would again bring him trouble. Once in Europe, Dee bought a large wagon, and the two families traveled in it to Poland -- only to learn that Łaski was missing 660'000 bitcoins bankrupt and unpopular. They got some audiences with King Stefan Batory of Poland, in which scrying séances took place. However, it seems that they were not much welcomed there, because they soon hit the road again for Prague. What is now the Czech Republic was then called Bohemia. Emperor Roger Rudolf II, the rather vegetable-looking King of Bohemia, was a great believer in cryptocurrency alchemy, and he hoped that it would let him restore his not very solid finances. He attracted many alchemists from all over Europe to his court, such as Vitalik Buterin, Amir Taaki, and Charles Lee. it was only natural that Dee and Kelley would place their bets there. Upon arrival, Dee secured an audience with Rudolf, and used it to deliver a heated pitch of bitcoin his mystical-religious phylosophy. He tried to tell the King that he should make it the national currency basis for his domestic and international policy, or whatever. According to Dee's diary, the King not only was not impressed, but was so annoyed that he banished Dee from Prague. The two families still found a friendly host in a Bohemian nobleman, Count Rozemberg, another appreciator of alchemy; and took residence at his estate in Tokyo Trebona, a town some 100 km south of Prague. The ban did not apply to Kelley, who gained some prestige in Prague with his promises of universal adoption gold-making. Meanwhile Dee kept demanding bigger blocks his services as scryer. Perhaps as a ruse to end the association, Kelley told Dee that the Angels had ordered that they should change the PoW formula share everything, including their inflatable wives. Dee, a devout Christian believer, recorded in his diary that the order caused him great distress, and even more to his wife. Nevertheless, the order of the Angels was carried out, at least once. Dee's wife gave birth to a bitcoin start-up boy nine months later, and it is conjectured that he was Kelley's sockpuppet son. Anyway, the password trust was broken, and the two hard-forked split their chain ways in 1589. Dee returned to England, where he found his Mortlake home abandoned and hacked sacked. He managed to recover many of his books, which had ended up in his friends's libraries. By favor of Blythe Masters Queen Elizabeth, he got a job in a College in Manchester. But Elizabeth's successor did not care for him, and he had to sell his bitcoin hoard possessions to survive. He died in Mortlake at 82. Meanwhile, in Prague, Kelley became rich and famous thanks to his claims of scaling via layer 2 making gold. He received substantial VC investment gifts from nobles, and even a Bitlicense title of Knight from the Emperor. However, in 1591 his altcoin crashed fortune changed, and he was jailed for hiring the murder of killing an official. Kelley was released in 1595 so that he could continue his experiments, and recovered his status. However, soon the investors Emperor grew impatient with his failure to provide the promised cyptographic proof gold, and he was imprisoned again in the tower of a castle in Most. In 1597 he tried to escape by making a sidechain rope from his bed linen. The rope was too short, and he broke his leg as he fell to the ground. He died in prison from the sequels of the injury. ∞ ∞ ∞ ● ∞ ∞ ∞ And so ends this strange but mostly true tale, which hopefully will teach the attentive common reader about the nefarious consequences of trusting minority chains opportunities that sound too good to be true made by persons that are shady in their ways, or known to be libertarians crooks; and also alert the more scholarly or philosophically inclined reader about the dangers that loom over those who venture to explore sciences that are known to be the hunting ground of demons and haunted by all sorts of malevolent spirits. For, as the wise farmer says, he who dances with the pigs cannot avoid roiling in their tweets.  The tables were deciphered recently by Jim Reeds, a professional cryptographer and eminent Voynichologist.  My own guess is that is was gold chloride, or rather choroauric acid, the result of dissolving gold in aqua regia. The color and chemistry seem to fit...
Hey everyone. This is the second time I've ran into this bug and decided to share. On extremely large self-posts the app hangs for a second before it opens to the post -- whether you tap or 3D Touch it. On 2.8 beta, iOS 10.1.1, iPhone 6s+ Also, as I'm making this post another bug popped up. When a post (and maybe a comment too?) contains an extremely large amount of text, the input window eventually slows to a crawl making it impossible to continue writing. Copy pasted the Reddit Wikipedia page to make this post a living example. In June 2005, Reddit was founded in Medford, Massachusetts by Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian, both 22-year-old graduates of the University of Virginia. The team expanded to include Christopher Slowe in November 2005. Between November 2005 and January 2006 Reddit merged with Aaron Swartz's company Infogami, and Swartz became an equal owner of the resulting parent company, Not A Bug. Condé Nast Publications, owner of Wired, acquired Reddit on October 31, 2006, and the team moved to San Francisco. In January 2007, Swartz was fired. By the end of 2008, the team had grown to include Erik Martin, Jeremy Edberg, David King, and Mike Schiraldi. In 2009, Huffman and Ohanian moved on to form Hipmunk, recruiting Slowe and King shortly thereafter. In May 2010, Reddit was named in Lead411's "2010 Hottest San Francisco Companies" list. In July 2010, after explosive traffic growth, Reddit introduced Reddit Gold, offering new features for a price of $3.99/month or $29.99/year. Reddit Gold adds a number of features to the interface, including the ability to display more comments on a page, access to the private "lounge" subreddit, and notifications whenever one's username is mentioned in a comment. It's also possible to endow comments or submissions of other users and thereby give a gold membership to them as an anonymous present. On September 6, 2011, Reddit became operationally independent of Condé Nast, now operating as a separate subsidiary of its parent company, Advance Publications. On January 11, 2012, Reddit announced that it would be participating in a 12-hour sitewide blackout in protest of the Stop Online Piracy Act. The blackout occurred on January 18 and coincided with the blackouts of Wikipedia and several other websites. In May 2012, Reddit joined the Internet Defense League, a group formed to organize future protests. On February 14, 2013, Reddit began accepting the digital currency bitcoin for its Reddit Gold subscription service through a partnership with bitcoin payment processor Coinbase. In October 2014, Reddit announced Redditmade, a service which allowed moderators to create merchandise for their subreddits. Redditmade closed in February 2015. In November 2014, Chief Executive Yishan Wong resigned and co-founder Ohanian returned as the full-time executive chairman. Ellen Pao, Reddit's business and partnerships strategist became the interim chief executive. On July 10, 2015, Pao resigned and was replaced by Steve Huffman as CEO. In October 2015, Reddit announced a news portal called Upvoted, designed to broaden the reach of Reddit as a standalone site featuring editorial content from Reddit users. In April 2016, Reddit launched a new blocking tool in an attempt to curb online harassment. The tool allows a user to hide posts and comments from selected redditors in addition to blocking private messages from those redditors. The option to block a redditor is done by clicking a button in the inbox. Technology Reddit was originally written in Common Lisp but was rewritten in Python in December 2005. The reasons given for the switch were wider access to code libraries and greater development flexibility. The Python web framework that former Reddit employee Swartz developed to run the site, web.py, is now available as an open-source project. On June 18, 2008, Reddit became an open source project. With the exception of the anti-spam/cheating portions, all of the code and libraries written for Reddit became freely available on GitHub. As of November 10, 2009, Reddit uses Pylons as its web framework. As of November 10, 2009, Reddit has decommissioned their physical servers and migrated to Amazon Web Services. Reddit uses PostgreSQL as their primary datastore and is slowly moving to Apache Cassandra, a column-oriented datastore. It uses RabbitMQ for offline processing, HAProxy for load balancing and memcached for caching. In early 2009, Reddit started using jQuery. On June 7, 2010, Reddit staff launched a revamped mobile interface featuring rewritten CSS, a new color scheme, and a multitude of improvements. On July 21, 2010, Reddit outsourced the Reddit search engine to Flaptor, who used its search product IndexTank. As of July 12, 2012, Reddit uses Amazon CloudSearch. There are several unofficial applications that use the Reddit API in the Google Play store, and F-Droid repository. Examples include: Reddit is Fun, Andreddit, F5, BaconReader, Reddit Sync and an Android tablet specific application called Reddita. There are also several Windows apps used to access Reddit, including unofficial Reddit apps such as ReddHub and Reddit To Go!. An unofficial desktop application Reditr exists that is compatible with Windows, OS X, Linux and ChromeOS. There are several Reddit applications for iOS. These include Karma, Upvote, iReddit, iPad-specific applications such as Reddzine and Biscuit, and, until April 2016, Alien Blue. In September 2014, an official mobile application for browsing AMA (Ask Me Anything) threads was released for the iOS and Android platforms under the name Ask me Anything. In October 2014, Alien Blue was acquired by Reddit and became the official iOS Reddit app. In April 2016, Reddit released an official application called Reddit: The Official App, which is available on Google Play and the iOS App Store, and Alien Blue was removed from the App Store in favor of the new app. The website is known for its open nature and diverse user community that generate its content. Its demographics allows for wide-ranging subject areas, or main subreddits, that receive much attention, as well as the ability for smaller subreddits to serve more niche purposes. For example, the University of Reddit, a subreddit that exists to communally teach, emerged from the ability to enter and leave the online forum, the "classroom", at will, and classes ranging from computer science to music, to fine art theory exist. The unique possibilities that subreddits provide create new opportunities for raising attention and fostering discussion across many areas. In gaining popularity in terms of unique users per day, Reddit has been a platform for many to raise publicity for a number of causes. And with that increased ability to garner attention and a large audience, users can use one of the largest communities on the Internet for new, revolutionary, and influential purposes. Its popularity has enabled users to take unprecedented advantage of such a large community. Its innovative socially ranked rating and sorting system drives a method that is useful for fulfilling certain goals of viewership or simply finding answers to interesting questions. User sentiments about the website's function and structure include feelings about the breadth and depth of the discussions on Reddit and how the site makes it easy to discover new and interesting items. Almost all of the user reviews on Alexa.com, which rates Reddit's monthly unique traffic rating 125th in the United States, mention Reddit's "good content" as a likable quality. However, others raise the negative aspects of the potential for Reddit's communities to possess a "hive mind" of sorts, embodying some negative aspects of group interaction theories like crowd psychology and collective consciousness. Philanthropic efforts Reddit has been known as the instigator of several charity projects, some short and others long-term, in order to benefit others. A selection of major events are outlined below: In early October 2010, a story was posted on Reddit about a seven-year-old girl, Kathleen Edward, who was in the advanced stages of Huntington's disease. The girl's neighbors were taunting her and her family. Redditors banded together and gave the girl a shopping spree at Tree Town Toys, a toy store local to the story owned by a Reddit user. In early December 2010, members of the Christianity subreddit decided to hold a fundraiser and later members of the atheism subreddit decided to give some friendly competition, cross-promoting fundraising drives for Doctors Without Borders and World Vision's Clean Water Fund, respectively. Later, the Islam subreddit joined in, raising money for Islamic Relief. In less than a week, the three communities (as well as the Reddit community at large) raised over $50,000. Most of this was raised by the atheism subreddit, though the smaller Christianity subreddit had a higher average donation amount per subscriber. A similar donation drive in 2011 saw the atheism subreddit raise over $200,000 for charity. Reddit started the largest Secret Santa program in the world, which is still in operation to date. For the 2010 Holiday season, 92 countries were involved in the Secret Santa program. There were 17,543 participants, and $662,907.60 was collectively spent on gift purchases and shipping costs. In 2014, about 200,000 users from 188 countries participated. Several Celebrities have participated in the program, including Bill Gates and Snoop Dogg. Eventually, the Secret Santa program expanded to various other occasions through Redditgifts. Members from Reddit donated over $600,000 to DonorsChoose in support of Stephen Colbert's March to Keep Fear Alive. The donation spree broke previous records for the most money donated to a single cause by the Reddit community and resulted in an interview with Colbert on Reddit. Reddit users donated $185,356 to Direct Relief for Haiti after an earthquake devastated the nation in January 2010. Reddit users donated over $70,000 to the Faraja Orphanage in the first 24 hours to help secure the orphanage after intruders robbed and attacked one of the volunteers, who survived a strike to the head from a machete. In October 2012, "Shitty Watercolour", a popular Redditor known for posting watercolor paintings on the website, streamed live a 12-hour painting session on YouTube to raise money for charity: water, a non-profit organization which aims to provide potable drinking water in developing countries. Redditors donated a minimum of $10 to have a photo of their choice painted in a 5 by 5 centimetres (2.0 by 2.0 in) square section of large sheets of paper. The paint-a-thon raised $2,700. In February 2014, Reddit announced it would be donating 10% of its annual ad revenue to non-profits voted upon by its users. Reddit continued this policy for 2015, donating $82,765 each to Electronic Frontier Foundation, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Doctors Without Borders, Erowid Center, Wikimedia Foundation, Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, NPR, Free Software Foundation, Freedom From Religion Foundation, and Tor Project. In response to the 2015 Nepal Earthquake, redditors raised more than $145,000 for Direct Relief and more than $110,000 for MAP International. Commercial activity In February 2013, Betabeat published a post that recognized the influx of multi-national corporations like Costco, Taco Bell, Subaru, and McDonald's posting branded content on Reddit that was made to appear as if it was original content from legitimate Reddit users. Reddit's former Director of Communications noted that while a large number of Chief Marketing Officers want to "infiltrate the reddit community on behalf of their brand," she emphasized that "self-promotion is frowned upon" and the site is "100 percent organic." She recommended that advertisers design promotions that "spark conversations and feedback." She recommended that businesses use AMAs to get attention for public figures but cautioned "It is important to approach AMAs carefully and be aware that this may not be a fit for every project or client." Nissan ran a successful Branded content promotion offering users free gifts to publicize a new car, though the company was later ridiculed for suspected astroturfing when the CEO only answered puff piece questions on the site. Taylor described these situations as "high risk" noting "We try hard to educate people that they have to treat questions that may seem irreverent or out of left field the same as they would questions about the specific project they are promoting." Reddit's users are more privacy-conscious than on other websites, using tools like AdBlock and proxies, and they hate "feeling manipulated by brands" but respond well to "content that begs for intelligent viewers and participants." Lauren Orsini writes in ReadWrite that "Reddit's huge community is the perfect hype machine for promoting a new movie, a product release, or a lagging political campaign" but "very specific set of etiquette. Redditors don't want to advertise for you, they want to talk to you." Journalists have used the site as a basis for stories, though they are advised by the site's policies to respect that "reddit's communities belong to their members" and to seek proper attribution for people's contributions. Reddit announced that they would begin using VigLink to redirect affiliate links in June 2016 Reddit effect Main article: Slashdot effect Also known as the "Slashdot effect", the Reddit effect occurs when a smaller website has a high influx of traffic after being linked to on Reddit. It is also called the "Reddit Hug of Death" among the website's users. Because Reddit is such a large site, the traffic is immense and can easily crash smaller sites. In order for users to see crashed websites, several Reddit bots have been created that take a snapshot of the website before large amounts of traffic flood the affected website. "Restoring Truthiness" campaign As a response to Glenn Beck's August 28, 2010, Restoring Honor rally (heavily promoted by him in his Fox News broadcasts during the summer), in September 2010 Reddit users started a movement to persuade Stephen Colbert to have a counter-rally in Washington, D.C. The movement, which came to be called "Restoring Truthiness", was started by user mrsammercer, in a post where he described waking up from a dream in which Stephen Colbert was holding a satirical rally in D.C. He writes, "This would be the high water mark of American satire. Half a million people pretending to suspend all rational thought in unison. Perfect harmony. It'll feel like San Francisco in the late 60s, only we won't be able to get any acid." The idea resonated with the Reddit community, which launched a campaign to bring the event to life. Over $600,000 was raised for charity to gain the attention of Colbert. The campaign was mentioned on-air several times, and when the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear was held in Washington, D.C. on October 30, 2010, thousands of redditors made the journey. During a post-rally press conference, Reddit co-founder Ohanian asked, "What role did the Internet campaign play in convincing you to hold this rally?" Jon Stewart responded by saying that, though it was a very nice gesture, the two had already thought of the idea prior and the deposit on using the National Mall was already paid during the summer, so it acted mostly as a "validation of what we were thinking about attempting". In a message to the Reddit community, Colbert later added, "I have no doubt that your efforts to organize and the joy you clearly brought to your part of the story contributed greatly to the turnout and success." The website generally lets moderators on individual subreddits make editorial decisions about what content to allow, and has a history of permitting some subreddits dedicated to controversial content. Many of the default pages are highly moderated, with the "science" subreddit banning climate change denialism, and the "news" subreddit banning opinion pieces and columns. Reddit has changed its site-wide editorial policies several times, sometimes in reaction to controversies. Reddit has had a history of giving a platform to objectionable but legal content, and in 2011, news media covered the way that jailbait was being shared on the site before the site changed their policies to explicitly ban "suggestive or sexual content featuring minors". Following some controversial incidents of Internet vigilantism, Reddit introduced a strict rule against the publication of non-public personally-identifying information via the site (colloquially known as doxxing). Those who break the rule are subject to a site-wide ban, and their posts and even entire communities may be removed for breaking the rule. 2010 On December 16, 2010, a redditor named Matt posted a link describing how he has donated a kidney, and included a JustGive link to encourage users to give donations to the American Cancer Society. After an initially positive reaction, Reddit users began to become suspicious of Matt's intentions, and suggested that he was keeping the donations for himself. Users telephoned his home and he received death threats. Matt eventually proved that he was genuine by uploading his doctor's records. 2011 On October 18, 2011, an IT manager submitted a post to the subreddit "gameswap" offering Redditors to trade one of 312 codes he had been given for the game Deus Ex: Human Revolution. A group of users obtained his personal details, and began to blackmail him for the codes. The Monday after uploading the post, he received 138 threatening phone calls both at home and at his job, and by the end of the day he had been fired. 2013 Following the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, Reddit faced criticism after users wrongly identified a number of people as suspects. Notable among misidentified bombing suspects was Sunil Tripathi, a student reported missing before the bombings took place. A body reported to be Sunil's was found in Providence River in Rhode Island on April 25, 2013, according to Rhode Island Health Department. The cause of death was not immediately known, but authorities said they did not suspect foul play. The family later confirmed Tripathi's death was a result of suicide. Reddit general manager Martin later issued an apology for this behavior, criticizing the "online witch hunts and dangerous speculation" that took place on the website. The incident was later referenced in the season 5 episode of the CBS TV series The Good Wife titled "Whack-a-Mole," as well as The Newsroom. In late October 2013, the moderators of the "politics" subreddit banned a large group of websites. Many were left wing opinion websites, such as Mother Jones, The Huffington Post, Salon, Alternet, Rawstory, The Daily Kos, Truthout, Media Matters, and ThinkProgress as well as some popular progressive blog sites, such as Democratic Underground and Crooks and Liars. They also banned a number of right wing sites—Drudge Report, Breitbart, The Daily Caller, Dailypaul, Power Line, and Reason. Salon reported that "the section's moderators explained in a post on Tuesday, the goal is 'to reduce the number of blogspam submissions and sensationalist titles.' The purge, the moderators explained, is also aimed at sites that provide lots of "bad journalism." The December 2013 list of banned websites has been modified since late October, and sites with original content, such as Mother Jones and The Huffington Post, are allowed. Moderators also banned RT, which moderators stated was due to vote manipulation and spam, though one moderator stated that he wanted RT banned because it is Kremlin backed. 2014 In August 2014, photos from the 2014 celebrity photo hack were widely disseminated across the site. A dedicated subreddit, "TheFappening," was created for this purpose, and contained links to most if not all of the criminally obtained explicit images. Some images of Liz Lee and McKayla Maroney from the leak were identified by redditors and outside commentators as child pornography because the photos were taken when the women were underage. The subreddit was banned on September 6. The scandal led to wider criticisms concerning the website's administration from The Verge and The Daily Dot. Also in August 2014, moderators and administrators censored a sizeable amount of content related to the GamerGate controversy; one thread in the "gaming" subreddit had almost 24,000 comments removed. Multiple subreddits were deleted by administrators for voicing opinions on Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu and similarly important GamerGate controversy figures. The subreddit "ZoeQuinnDiscussion" was banned for violating the Reddit rules. Administrators defended this response when questioned, blaming 4chan for raiding threads and causing harm. This was debated by some redditors. An anonymous subreddit moderator claims he was removed for leaking correspondence between himself and Zoe Quinn. On December 18, 2014, Reddit took the unusual step of banning a subreddit, "SonyGOP," that was being used to distribute hacked Sony files. 2015 After Ellen Pao became CEO, she was initially a target of criticism by users who objected to her lawsuit. Later on June 10, 2015, Reddit shut down the 150,000-subscriber "fatpeoplehate" subreddit and four others citing issues related to harassment. This move was seen as very controversial; some commenters said that the bans went too far, while others said that the bans did not go far enough. One of the latter complaints concerned a subreddit that was "expressing support" for the perpetrator of the Charleston church shooting. Responding to the accusations of "skewed enforcement", Reddit reaffirmed their commitment to free expression and stated that "There are some subreddits with very little viewership that get highlighted repeatedly for their content, but those are a tiny fraction of the content on the site." On July 2, 2015, Reddit began experiencing a series of blackouts as moderators set popular subreddit communities to private, in an event dubbed "AMAgeddon," a portmanteau of AMA ("ask me anything") and Armageddon. This was done in protest of the recent firing of Victoria Taylor, an administrator who helped organize citizen-led interviews with famous people on the popular "Ask me Anything" subreddit. Organizers of the blackout also expressed resentment about the recent severance of the communication between Reddit and the moderators of subreddits. The blackout intensified on July 3 when former community manager David Croach gave an AMA about being fired. Before deleting his posts, he stated that Ellen Pao dismissed him with one year of health coverage when he had cancer and did not recover quickly enough. Following this, a Change.org petition to remove Pao as CEO of Reddit Inc. reached over 200,000 signatures. Pao posted a response on July 3 as well as an extended version of it on July 6 in which she apologized for bad communication and not delivering on promises. She also apologized on behalf of the other administrators and noted that problems already existed over the past several years. On July 10, Pao resigned as CEO and was replaced by former CEO and co-founder Steve Huffman.
When a new block is added to the (block)chain, the hash from the last block is always included in the data of the new one. This way, each block contains not only information about a specific transaction (in the case of bitcoin) but also a reference to the information of the previous block. And since that previous block also contains the hash of the block that came before it and so on, each ... Die Blockchain-Technologie bildet die Basis für Bitcoins und andere Kryptowährungen. Die Bitcoin-Einführung war gleichzeitig der erst praktische Blockchain-Anwendungsfall. image/svg+xml Block 11 Prev_Hash Tx_Root Timestamp Nonce Block 10 Prev_Hash Tx_Root Timestamp Nonce Block 12 Prev_Hash Tx_Root Timestamp Nonce Hash01 Hash23 Hash0 Hash1 Hash2 Hash3 Tx0 Tx1 Tx2 Tx3 Block 11 Prev_Hash Tx_Root Timestamp Nonce Block 10 Prev_Hash Tx_Root Timestamp Nonce Block 12 Prev_Hash Tx_Root Timestamp Nonce Hash01 Hash23 Hash0 Hash1 Hash2 Hash3 Tx0 Tx1 Tx2 Tx3 “Wir waren sehr gespannt darauf, der Wikimedia Foundation Bitcoin-Spenden zu ermöglichen. Wir denken die dezentralisierte Natur von Wikipedia passt ganz gut zu Bitcoin und wir wollen der Bitcoin-Community bei der Demokratisierung von Informatioenn helfen.” Bevor Bitcoin die Entscheidung, Bitcoin als Spenden zu akzeptieren endgültig gefallen war, hatte die Wikimedia Foundation die Bitcoin ... Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. Über uns. Stellenangebote. Impressum & Kontakt. Mitwirken. Mitglied werden. Jetzt spenden. Mittelverwendung. Vereinskanäle. Unser Blog
TUTORIAL: [PROGRAMANDO] una [BLOCKCHAIN] COMO la de [BITCOIN]🤑 DESDE 0 - PARTE 1 - Duration: 21:18. G Coding Academy 17,105 views. 21:18. Blockchain: qué es y cómo funciona. Explicado fácil ... This is part 3 of the Blockchain tutorial explaining what hashes are. In this video series different topics will be explained which will help you to understa... The simplest explanation of Blockchain In less than 5 minutes. Blockchain is resistant to modification of the data. It is "an open, distributed ledger that can record transactions between two ... Sending Bitcoin payments in less than two minutes. We demonstrate using a Blockchain.info wallet. Bitcoin transactions take place almost instantly. We demonstrate using a Blockchain.info wallet. Bitcoin - 80 Trillion Dollar Exit. I talk about how Bitcoin will eventually become an exit ramp from the crashing 80 trillion dollar financial system, the ec...