Mining - Bitcoin Wiki

Sustainable Emacs development - some thoughts and analysis

Influenced by some recent posts, I have decided to outline some ideas I've written about monetarily sustaining Emacs development.
Emacs is amazing software. Although not without its shortcomings, there are many things that Emacs gets right. One of the best things(if not the best) about Emacs is the community. With the latest developments in text editing being "Let's put the editor in the browser!" and "Let's rewrite stuff", let's take a look at packages that came about in the Emacs world:
And there are many old and new ones including org, fireplace.el, lispy, cider, and so forth.
Writing and maintaining these packages is no simple task. Not only does it require creativity and ingenuity to come up with better ways of pressing on keys, it also requires understanding Emacs and its API(not easy) and being a good Emacs Lisp programmer(not easy).
Not to mention the core maintainers and developers. While I might not agree with certain opinions, I admire the amount of work and soul they put into this project.
So how do we, as a community, support it?
Monetarily, not well.
It's hard to find stats on how much money is donated through FSF(more on that later), let's examine publically available information on how much money is donated to emacs projects:
Magit - 244 dollars a month.[] Projectile - 17$ a month on bontysource, 8$ a month of gratipay [] [] Helm - [] 6% a month on patreon.
and so forth. I find it shameful, and I wish for it to change.
Before I move forward with the post, I'd like to play some devil advocate with myself:
"I support projects by writing packages and making contributions" - sure, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't be rewarded for your contribution.
"This is a problem with Libre Software in general - there's little incentive in people to pay for it" - true, but I think we can also smooth certain corners. More on that below.
"Well, what have you done to change this?" - Nothing. I'm the worst of both worlds, haven't contributed anything in terms of code or money to the community. That's not the point.
"People do it for fun and not for money" - again, doesn't mean they shouldn't be rewarded.
I look at this selfishly. Emacs has been attracting some top-notch guys that do some incredible things, and I want them to stay there working on the editor that I use.
But alas, so far I have contributed 0$ in support.
I see myself spending anywhere around 100$ supporting the Emacs community for what I already have access for and maybe setting up monthly contributions if I believe that these money goes to further work on my editor.
So why haven't I donated so far? While it is true that there are market failures that are characteristic of any open-source market, there are certain transaction costs that could be brought down with the kind of brainpower this community has.
Firstly, let's take a look at supporting Emacs core. There's actually no way to do that I could find. You can donate to FSF project in general here, and while it is certainly worthy of your money to support the non-profit and their cause, I have following concerns(controversial):
For my reasons, I don't use/know of many of the projects that FSF owns/supports. I use Emacs, and I wish to donate to Emacs. I believe FSF is missing out on valuable information when they make one big sink donation called "Support Free Software". How do you know which projects are needed by the users and which ones are not? It's akin to having an Android phone and instead of it being an open market it is "pay 100$ a year for a bunch of apps". However, the above critique is not enough to justify not supporting their cause, so in writing this post I decided to contribute. I encourage you to do so too.
Emacs core out of the way, Why don't I donate money on Patreon or bountysource or gratipay?
There is, of course, the obvious pain of tracking and setting up accounts and fussling with cards. There's the feeling that "It'll be fine", or "I'll do it some other time". So let's think how can we make a monkey with a short attention span like me to actually donate for his/her editor.
When I find the desire to donate, I would like to donate for my entirety of Emacs experience - starting from Emacs Core and Magit to fireplace.el and tetris. I desire to mentally figure out a sum that I'm willing to donate(let's say 70$), a period of time(one-time or recurring), and spend as little time doing so.
The way things are right now, the above is not possible. Time for some self-made criticism again.
"You are just a lazy fuck. Invest some time in your day and pay some money. How much time a working day you spend messing around with your config? Wouldn't you want to more things to mess with?"
I fully agree. There's little excuse.
However, we are not done examining my editor yet - the vast majority of packages I use do not have a donation page at all.
Given all of the above, I started writing a system that would alleviate some of my concerns.
My first idea was the donate-emacs package/website combo. By installing(or just distributing with emacs) a donate-emacs package, it would parse your package-alist and make a post request to the donate-emacs server. It would then parse generate a page that looks something like this and presents you with dials customizing how you want to donate - one-time payment, once in a period, etc.
This quickly presented the following problems:
Suppose they donate money, how should they be transferred to contributors/maintainers?
After some time, I decided in the making that I should manage cryptocurrency payments only - they are far easier to manage and don't present the third party problem inherent to credit cards.
That is when I realized, why bother with websites at all? My potential users are Emacs users - if something can be done within Emacs why not do so? Why not make improvements to package-list that would include the interface I've outlined above? A user would pull the list of packages installed, press some C-c bindings to register a Bitcoin wallet and setup the donations however they want, and manage it anytime from emacs.
Hence, I started to write wallet.el to manage cryptocurrencies within Emacs.
This approach quickly presented problems too. It's easy to setup a Bitcoin wallet somewhere on some website and then forward the money from it to some Bitcoin address, but I haven't found an API or a cli that I could use that I would be able to do the above from emacs.
So, I admit I'm way over my head and have decided to reach out. I know literally next to nothing about bitcoins and cryptocurrencies, and I haven't even finished reading through the Emacs manuals yet. Besides, I'm not even sure if the above is the right way to do it.
What do you guys think?
submitted by voltecrus to emacs [link] [comments]

Dev Meeting Notes, 2016 08 22

#namecoin-meeting notes, 2016 08 21 # Present: Jeremy Jonas Brandon Midnightmagic Pigeons Joseph Namecoin Core The wallet name operation bug in Brandon's name tab PR has been isolated by Jeremy. Appears to be a bug in upstream Bitcoin Core (or perhaps Namecoin Core master branch) that has been fixed. Whit Jackson submitted a documentation PR for building on OS X. If anyone can test, please do so! Jonas will test this. Jeremy noticed that Travis CI accidentally flagged our repo as "potential abuse detected". Jeremy contacted Travis CI support and got our account whitelisted. Jonas notices that the Travis CI builds for our 0.13 branch are failing at the moment. Jeremy suggests filing a GitHub issue. Jeremy asked Jonas to submit a PR for Gitian builds for OS X. DrHaribo of BitMinter requested that getblocktemplate be re-added to Namecoin Core. Jeremy points out that since nVersion=4 blocks are nearing the lock-in point, we should deal with this sooner rather than later so that BitMinter doesn't get kicked off the network. Brandon asked on GitHub about how wallet unlocking should be done with the name tab GUI. Upon discussion, Brandon currently plans to try using the raw transaction API for this. Daniel submitted a PR to temporarily disable the low-S standardness check. This should improve confirmation times for the old 0.3.80 clients. The check will be restored after AAA activates. Test reports would be great. Jeremy points out that this needs to be done before nVersion=4 blocks are locked in. Jeremy wonders whether we should cancel plans to release 0.12 as stable, and focus on 0.13 branch. Tentative plan: keep maintaining 0.12 until Bitcoin Core releases v0.13.0; backport the name tab to whatever stable branch exists at the time that it's merged to master. SPV Jeremy's initial PR for Namecoin support has been merged to libdohj. Jeremy still needs to rebase the bitcoinj-addons code based on the libdohj changes made during review, and then submit a pull request. In the meantime, Jeremy's latest bitcoinj-addons and libdohj code is posted. Someone please test it? Jeremy asks if he should post a link on Reddit. Jonas says yes. Jeremy will do so. ncdns Jeremy asked about the old fork of a Conformal library (see previous meeting); Hugo doesn't recall details but thinks it had to do with pre-Namecoin-Core not following spec properly. Hugo would be happy to accept a PR to make it use the current Conformal libs. Jeremy pointed out that sometime in the future we should fix the Extended Key Usage Critical flag on the dehydrated cert template. Go's standard library doesn't have a built-in way of setting that flag, which is why it's not in the first draft. Jeremy and Ryan can't think of any plausible attacks where it matters. Jeremy suggests a 1.0 BTC bounty for an ncdns NSIS installer. Possibly funded 50/50 by NMDF and a fundraiser. Mining Cassini noticed that BTCC and ViaBTC have started mining Namecoin. This is good news for mining diversity. F2Pool's share of Namecoin blocks is down to circa 43% as of July 26, 2016. Public Relations Cassini represented us at GETD#4 in Berlin July 22-23. Jeremy mentions that we should think about translation workflow. Jeremy notes that Bitcoin Core is using Transifex. Jeremy says that whatever works for Bitcoin Core, should probably work for us. Midnightmagic concurs. Joseph believes that Armory (post-ATI) is trying Transifex. Brandon asks what the pricing looks like for Transifex. Joseph believes it's gratis for open-source projects. Jeremy notes that Wikipedia confirms this. Jeremy wonders what safeguards are in place on Transifex to reduce risk of malicious translations. Joseph isn't sure. Jeremy points out that the way we organize the list of exchanges doesn't make sense for decentralized exchanges like Bitsquare. Jeremy suggests listing decentralized exchanges at the top of the list. Jeremy notes that this might annoy the centralized exchanges who pay us for placement, but that this doesn't bother him at all. Midnightmagic concurs. Pigeons mentions that he's seen an increase in Namecoin offers on Bitsquare recently. Jeremy will have a table at the OU CS welcome party on Sept. 9. Let's try to recruit some developers! Brandon asks what the status is of the students from last year. Jeremy is sad to report that the SPV student and the UX student from last year are not participating this semester. Pigeons says a "Namecoin vs Blockstack" FAQ entry would be helpful. Jeremy will work on it. Midnightmagic asks if a meetingbot would be welcome. Jeremy says yes. Midnightmagic will look at setting one up. Funding Jeremy has filed a complaint with Tip4Commit about their usage of CloudFlare CAPTCHAs. Tip4Commit has not responded after 25 days. BountySource balance: $5/month from 1 recurring supporter Total funds available: $304 USD Pigeons suggests looking into Patreon. Jeremy notes that they have CloudFlare CAPTCHAs. Jeremy notes that Wikipedia says they take a 5% commision, which is half of BountySource's 10%. Jeremy notes that some free software projects use them currently. Jeremy will look into this in more detail later. NMDF incoming funds: 0 mBTC received since 2016 07 03 0 NMC received since 2016 07 03 Pigeons suggests looking into Flattr. Jeremy notes that they have CloudFlare CAPTCHAs. Jeremy notes that Wikipedia says they take a 10% fee (same as BountySource). Jeremy will look into this in more detail later. 
Note: I made a typo in the title of this post on Reddit; the quoted date of the meeting is correct. (I can't see a way to edit the title of a Reddit post.)
submitted by biolizard89 to Namecoin [link] [comments]

Do i understand the blockchain right?

I felt that i understood the blockchain by now, but the range of transactions that are possible, their usefulness, and the apparent ease with which they could be implemented in that understanding dont seem to match reality. The question then is, either there is a reason it isnt being implemented, in the newer coins, or my understanding is off. In older coins, maybe they are afraid it will break things in existing coins, but then the question is the same about the new coins.
Now for my understanding of the blockchain: Basically you take a checksum of appended:
 checksum_of_previous block miners_pubkey value_you_scan_for_mining (each one gives a new checksum with a shot of beating the difficulty) accepted_transactions ... (whole list) 
The result of the checksum is the score, if you get a score below the current difficulty for a correct block. (Havent figured out how that is agreed on yet) You win the block, and may refer to it, to use it as money in your reward. A block is correct only if the transactions are also valid; i.e. dont send more than a wallet contains, all signatures must check out.(most transactions have signature, unless they're attached to the miner somehow)
Of course some point in the network may not know about better scores existing, to avoid that, the longest chain wins. Miners and nodes would become aware of longer chains implying their earning would go lost if those chains won outright, so they'd switch.
Edit: whether the above is correct is essentially the question, the below indicates the kinds of transactions that seem missing.
However in this understanding transactions can be really arbitrary, basically anything the other nodes can check. And apparently bitcoin has a whole scripting language for them, but why isnt it being used? There are many potential uses:(not neccesarily of the scripting language, but in principle doable with transactions)
Edit: if it is the scripting engine that might be secure, maybe a whitelist, or specific commands could be introduced.
BTW1: this also covers a view of proof of stake, and thoughts on 'proof of serve', but i dont think that relates much
BTW2: havent tried understanding all of these yet, afaik they're not in there.
submitted by Jasper1984 to dogeducation [link] [comments]

Dev Meeting Notes, 2016 05 15

#namecoin-meeting notes, 2016 05 15 # Present: Jeremy Jonas Joseph pigeons Housekeeping: Jeremy was away for the past week due to finals week. He's back now. As a result, this is a shorter meeting than last meeting. Namecoin Core Progress toward 0.12.0 milestone 7 tickets are closed, 5 remain open Windows Gitian builds Jeremy fixed Gitian Windows builds in master branch. OS X Gitian builds Jonas says that extracting the OS X SDK from Linux didn't seem to work; it produced a tar.gz that was very different in file size from the one produced on OS X. Jonas says it might be a good idea to just create the tar.gz deterministically on OS X and publish the hash. Jeremy is curious if the difference is innocuous. Do the content files have the same hash when extracted? Joseph suggests Debian's diffoscope tool. Jeremy says maybe ask Cory Fields from Bitcoin whether he knows anything about this, seeing as this topic is applicable to Bitcoin. Last week Jonas noted that Bitcoin Classic has a Gitian build for ARM, wondered if it would be useful for us. Jeremy checked; the commit was submitted to Bitcoin Core but was rejected due to poor code quality. So far no one has cleaned it up. 0.3.80 / Core compatibility johnc reports that 0.3.80 has trouble downloading blockchain from Core. Jeremy wonders if this is something that we actually care about or need to fix. 0.3.80 is being hardforked off the network soon anyway. Jeremy doesn't see much reason to expend effort on making it easier to run 0.3.80. Jonas concurs that it's not a problem we need to fix Travis Builds Daniel fixed a Travis build issue relating to BIP 9. There's still at least 1 Travis build issue remaining. Regarding the wallet corruption issue that Jeremy brought up last meeting The bug reporter confirms that Namecoin Core is not affected by the bug. Only Namecoin 0.3.80 is. Jeremy was able to help the reporter recover his wallet using the -salvagewallet option in Namecoin Core. Jonas mentions that someone is still mining on testnet with the old 0.3.80 client. This is annoying for people who are trying to sync the testnet. BitcoinJ Jeremy is still tinkering with BitcoinJ. Jeremy got an SPV name lookup to work. Not optimized at all yet; Jeremy has ideas for making it work better. Public Relations Jekyll site No NACKs received on Jekyll site, so Jeremy will push it to production as soon as possible. Downloads page Consensus on GitHub is to link to Namecoin Core binaries on the main downloads page. Full details at . If anyone disagree with this course of action, say so on GitHub before we get around to filing a PR. Exchanges page Jeremy suggests adding Bitsquare Jeremy notes that Kraken is delisting Namecoin soon. Jeremy considers this unsurprising; Kraken's AML policies caused most users to use ShapeShift or Bitsquare instead. We should remove Kraken from the Exchanges page. Funding BountySource balance: $5/month from 1 recurring supporter Total funds available: $164 USD 
submitted by biolizard89 to Namecoin [link] [comments]

Dev Meeting Notes, 2016 07 03

#namecoin-meeting notes, 2016 07 03 # Present: Jeremy Jonas Samurai pigeons midnightmagic Decentralized Web Summit Jeremy attended DWS. Blog post summary is in PR. Note the new News layout / links, the Earlier News link, and the new post from June 20. Jonas ACKs. Namecoin Core Merged Mining Jorge Timon suggested replacing the MM chain ID with the BIP 122 chain ID. OS X Gitian Builds Jonas posted an OS X Gitian binary of Brandon's name tab PR Jonas will look into submitting a PR. Look into deterministically generating SDK input. PGP keys Jonas reminds everyone that we need to get our PGP keys into GitHub for Gitian. AAA hardfork Samurai asks if any problems expected short-term. Jeremy is pretty sure we're fine until Bitcoin schedules bit 0x100 for VersionBits. SegWit is bit 0x2. SPV Jeremy sent PR to libdohj. Currently undergoing review. Specs Jeremy posted draft Dehydrated Cert spec. Review would be appreciated. ncdns Jeremy noticed a bug in ncdns's JSON-RPC library that breaks connecting to the SPV client. Jeremy fixed it, but wonders why we're even using that library. It appears to be a very old library from Conformal that was abandoned over a year ago. Bring this up with Hugo (he didn't attend this meeting). Public Relations A bunch of website PR's have been ACKed by Jonas and merged by Jeremy. Jeremy added new "Donations" page to website. Jeremy added new FAQ to website. Funding libcoin-related bounties have been refunded by BountySource. BountySource balance: $5/month from 1 recurring supporter Total funds available: $299 USD NMDF incoming funds: 98.4 mBTC received since 2016 05 15 0 NMC received since 2016 05 15 
submitted by biolizard89 to Namecoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin sinhala Airdrops and Bounty 01..Introduction about Free coins ,Bounty and Airdrops Bitcoin Private - BTCP - YouTube What is a Crypto Bounty program - Simply explained #2 Mineradora de Bitcoin  XashMining  Free Hash 100 GH/s  + Provas de Pagamento BitcoHash!! 2020 Mining Websit BTC Mine Daily 10$ Bounty Reward 100$

The final point worth mentioning is, while Bitcoin mining is very tough these days, there are hundreds of other currencies out there needing to be mined, and many of those are going to be much more profitable than Bitcoin. In fact one of my preferred Miners offer a 'smart mining' option where it automatically applies your resources to the currency that has been most profitable in the last hour ... Bitcoin is Secure. Bitcoin miners help keep the Bitcoin network secure by approving transactions. Mining is an important and integral part of Bitcoin that ensures fairness while keeping the Bitcoin network stable, safe and secure. Links. We Use Coins - Learn all about crypto-currency. Bitcoin News - Where the Bitcoin community gets news. Many Bountysource users have been requesting Bitcoin support for funding endeavors, and it has finally become a reality. By providing Bitcoin support, users can now pay and earn with BTC for all types of payments, while also having the ability to cash out in Bitcoin. In addition, users will also be able to select which currency they would like to view on the platform’s homepage. Bountysource ... CoinCreator: Create your own ICOs, Crypto-Currency and Tokens The Token Only Option allows you to create just a token without a crowdsale. This is useful for issuing tokens directly for things such as event tickets, coupons, etc. This is like your stock ticker symbol, choose something memerable Initial supply is amoun Bitcoin Private will make the move to Equihash 192,7; which effectively increase the amount of memory required to hash the algorithm. This change will thwart the Equihash ASIC miners, like the ...

[index] [42078] [37435] [17105] [16181] [24426] [7670] [23965] [43996] [5667] [3295]

Bitcoin sinhala Airdrops and Bounty 01..Introduction about Free coins ,Bounty and Airdrops

Bitcoin for Beginners 8,644 views. 6:56. What is bug bounty and how to earn from it - Duration: 10:46. Hitesh Choudhary Recommended for you. 10:46. Consensus and Mining on the Blockchain ... Kostenloser Download Crypto Mining Software: Link 1: Link 2: SITUS PENGHASIL DOLAR TERBARU 2018 cara mudah mendapatkan uang di internet gratis untuk pemula - Duration: 5:36. Dhewan Pratama 10,679 views This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue ️ Crypto-Mining.Biz is HYIP (High-yield Investment Program). HYIPs may offer attractive high yield interest schemes. Yet, they are risky. You are fully responsible for your actions, so join any ...