cfields_: not a high priority thing though building bitcoin core *on* my phone would be quite awesome
cfields_: hey, I've been trying something weird: to build bitcoin core in the 'termux' environment on my android phone. This is basically just a arm (64 bit in this case) Linux system, with one catch: there is no shell interpreter, or anything useful for that matter in /bin. All the shell utilities are available in the path though.
Which Core dev would be willing to review and creat any needed unit test for this in demand pull request - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7534 I would be willing to offer a reward of 0.5BTC for efforts pushing this through. I apologize in advance if this question is inappropriate for this venue as Im not familiar with any precedents
gmaxwell: dunno about debian, but the oldest ubuntu lts which is still supported cant build bitcoin in c++11 mode (despite its version of clang supporting it) because its version of boost doesnt build in C++11 mode
should I submit a PR for the alert or will someone with commit access to bitcoin.org sign and push the commit?
a black paper would waste lots of ink; you don't want critics to accuse bitcoin of using lots of energy as well as ink now
was there anyone offering to do the legwork on a bitcoin core whitepaper?
nevermind that it's wrong in a few places, and we've learned _a lot_ about teaching people about Bitcoin since 2008.
so you might not be aware, but cobra proposed putting up an updated whitepaper on bitcoin.org with varrious errata and it started a week long lynchmob thing. OMG YOU CHALLENGED THE HOLY WORD.
(it was fixed around the same time that bitcoin first moved off the minimum difficulty)
Bitcoin's best chain selection is not 'most blocks', it's 'most work'.
re: checkpointing - is there anything in Bitcoin consensus to prevent someone from going back 2048 blocks to a much lower difficulty, and then doing a 51% attack from there to get the longest chain? I think I must be missing a subtle consensus rule here
but it sounds sensible to me, most altcoins descent from litecoin, or the 'PoS' coins after that, not bitcoin directly
gmaxwell, I would be curious to hear your opinion in the creator of Certificate Transparency's criticisms of Bitcoin, who argues that Bitcoin is not decentralized unless 51% of the world's processing power is doing Bitcoin hashing, and therefore you have to trust the people who set the checkpoints in the Bitcoin source code otherwise you can just rewrite the chain.
gmaxwell, there are papers that suggest that bitcoin doesn't need mining if you collapse Bitcoin into Certificate Transparency-like system, but that assumes a level of trust in a set of distributed actors
musalbas: if it were actually solvable in a strong sense bitcoin wouldn't need mining.
I haven't been too generally impressed with the utility of lcov on the bitcoin core codebase-- better than nothing I guess, but the branch coverage is full of BS unreachable branches due allocations in templaized container objects.
heck or just a bash alias. bitcoin-cli getwalletinfo && bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo | head -20 or such. I'd been overthinking it a bit because I thought it was neat to do RPC batch from bitcoin-cli
[bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #8877: Qt RPC console: history sensitive-data filter, and saving input line when browsing history (master...qt_console_history_filter) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8877