Bitcoin Core

Bitcoin Core non-official subreddit

Bitcoin Core technical discussions only. Non official.
[link]

Bitcoin Core

Bitcoin Core software’s news and discussion
[link]

Bitcoin Core

Bitcoin Core software’s news and discussion.
[link]

There is a Twitter bot that notifies you of issues on the Bitcoin Core GitHub that are tagged "good first issue" (useful if someone wants to start contributing)

submitted by TheGreatMuffin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Angela Walch: "Is there a resource that keeps an up-to-date list of those who have commit access to the Bitcoin Core Github repo & who pays them for their work on Bitcoin? In the past, getting this info has required digging. Is that still the case? "

Angela Walch: submitted by Egon_1 to btc [link] [comments]

A design I did for an on-boarding wizard for Bitcoin Core - any feedback would be much appreciated. Please read the relevant GitHub issue before replying - https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/81.

A design I did for an on-boarding wizard for Bitcoin Core - any feedback would be much appreciated. Please read the relevant GitHub issue before replying - https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/81. submitted by Bosch-1 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I was looking into trying to find the original BTC code implementaiton. I've got a github link of the first commit if interested

This is the first commit to the bitcoin github repo
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/4405b78d6059e536c36974088a8ed4d9f0f29898
I wanted to get this so i can read and understand it. the bitcoin core github has evolved this into something much more complex and unapproachable, so decided to try to find the first commit instead. the code is more readable, there are only 20 something files c++ files
its an implementation that worked, with some tidying up to do. there were bug fixes that followed even before the fork. so its good to see it in its first form
this is an interesitng one
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/4405b78d6059e536c36974088a8ed4d9f0f29898/market.cpp
// // Global state variables // //// later figure out how these are persisted map mapMyProducts; 
reminds me of doing dev with a //todo
submitted by Neophyte- to btc [link] [comments]

@ the trolls saying "No one uses Bitcoin Cash", let's look at the last 60 blocks...

I'm just gonna count blocks over 100kb:
584744 200 kb, 548 transactions
584742 187 kb, 461
584739 139 kb, 429
584738 690 kb, 1,698
584737 200 kb, 561
584735 131 kb, 411
584730 225 kb, 630
584729 101 kb, 344
584728 191 kb, 523
584727 238 kb, 518
584726 358 kb, 843
584723 153 kb, 437
584722 357 kb, 1,128
584719 311 kb, 927
584718 643 kb, 54
584715 127 kb, 419
584713 263 kb, 810
584712 499 kb, 1388
584710 242 kb, 749
584709 306 kb, 863
584708 198 kb, 557
584707 151 kb, 431
584706 571 kb, 1,537
584704 188 kb, 600
584703 129 kb, 352
584702 489 kb, 1,497
584700 267 kb, 767
584699 206 kb, 544
584698 116 kb, 347
584694 787 kb, 2,159
584691 228 kb, 551
So, out of the last 60 blocks, ten-hour's worth, 32 are more than 100 kb, with 19 of them being over 200 kb and 10 being over 300 kb.
If we had a 1mb blocksize limit, this would already be extremely alarming levels of activity, meaning that we are too close to the blocksize cap, and this looks similar to what BTC looked like in roughly 2015 / 2016, back when Mike Hearn was ringing the alarm bells about the need to raise the BTC blocksize, and the Core crowd had just taken over control of the Bitcoin Core Github due to Wladimir and realized they could therefore do anything they wanted to BTC as long as they convinced the BTC community that it was in their best interests.
Using this position of authority and control of both Bitcointalk.org and bitcoin, they implemented censorship so that their push to change the direction of bitcoin would be effective, they pushed out mods from bitcoin that weren't on board with them.
You might also note that the BCH price is currently about the same as what BTC was back in 2016 when it had this level of activity, shortly before the 2016 Halvening. At this time BTC was worth $400 and after the halvening quickly shot to $700, and increased during the 2017 bull-run.
But it was during the 2017 bull run that it finally happened, the limit of the blocksize was completely reach. Blocks were 1 mb and maxed out, and the only way to get your transaction through next block was to pay ridiculous fees. I myself paid a $5 fee that was stuck for an entire week, and a friend of mine paid a $50 fee that was stuck for 2 hours.
Mike Hearn was making noise and ringing the alarm bells for the need for a bigger block cap all the way back in 2015, he knew this would happen, and the Core devs, today known as Blockstream, iced him out of BTC development, ignored his Github pushes, and attacked his character behind his back like guttersnipes. So he left.
Cryptocurrency lost one of its greatest developers.
They did the same to Gavin Andresen, the man that Satoshi Nakamoto himself entrusted with caring for the bitcoin project. He has since left as well.
Make no mistake, the Core devs are enemies of bitcoin as a concept, they have hijacked the project, completely changed its direction and are currently painting it into a corner while lulling their community and stoking tribalistic anger at all competitors.
https://imgur.com/pLE0a5P.png
This "no one uses bitcoin cash" line is going to die very soon, because it looks like it will not be long before BCH surpasses BTC on transactions. And I predict right now that their new line will be that these are simply spam transactions and not legitimate activity.
Even though we all know that paying a transaction fee means a transaction is legit, it's a use of the system, regardless of intent. There is no such thing as a spam transaction that pays a miner's fee.
Anyone claiming no one uses BCH is a liar or a shill, let this be the end of that idiotic claim.
submitted by Anenome5 to btc [link] [comments]

New Bitcoin asset profile from Messari

Hello Bitcoin
We've ramped up the profile pages for all of the top crypto assets https://messari.io/asset/bitcoin/profile
Each profile is loaded with a ton of new information from project history, investors, advisors, regulatory information, contributors, roadmap and a whole bunch more.
Our analysts put together a concise overview of Bitcoin governance, among other things:
Model Overview Bitcoin governance is the process by which protocol rules are decided upon, implemented, and enforced. Users (full nodes) adopt new rules according to their subjective views on what Bitcoin is and should be. If two or more individuals adopt the same set of rules, they form an inter-subjective social consensus of what “Bitcoin” is. It is in this respect that many conceptualize Bitcoin as being set by a social contract. Every time rule changes are contemplated, the rules of the contract are decided and renegotiated continuously between stakeholders. Protocol changes are legitimized when users agree to adopt the new changes. Once adopted, the Bitcoin protocol automates the enforcement of the social contract.
Process Overview Protocol development is governed by a proposal process whereby anyone in the open source Bitcoin community can submit Bitcoin Improvement Proposals ("BIPs"). After debate by the community, when consensus has emerged, the Bitcoin Core maintainers merge code changes into Bitcoin Core's GitHub Repository. Once new code has been implemented into the Bitcoin Core specification, users of the network (full nodes) must be persuaded to adopt the new changes. Protocol changes are “ratified” on-chain when the majority of the network adopts the upgrade and doesn’t break consensus.
Once rules are adopted on-chain, all new transactions and block proposals are subject to the agreed upon rules. Full nodes only accept new transactions and block proposals that are valid according to the rules of the Bitcoin protocol. Anything that is not valid will be rejected. Thus, miners must implement the prevailing rules of the network in order to participate in the block creation process.
User Activated Hard Fork 2017's User Activated Soft Fork Event provided an illustrative case study on Bitcoin governance in practice.
As early as 2010, shortly after Satoshi implemented a block limit into Bitcoin, discussions around block size began. These discussions largely stayed in the background until 2017 when tensions within the Bitcoin community rose over rising transaction fees and increasingly divergent opinions on scaling Bitcoin. In May 2017, a meeting between miners, businesses, investors, and core developers took place at the Consensus conference in New York, in what is now referred to as the "New York Agreement". The product of this meeting was an agreement to support SegWit (a soft fork) and a 2MB block size (hard fork).
Known as SegWit2x, this proposal was backed by over 80% of the network’s hash rate. However, despite the desires of miners, users wanted to activate SegWit without the block size increase. This plan was proposed as BIP 148, a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal, from a pseudonymous developer named Shaolinfry. Soon after, users set a date (August 1, 2017) where Bitcoin would soft fork to support SegWit and keep the 1MB block size. Eventually, enough nodes signaled support for it, forcing miners to accept or have their blocks rejected by the network.
Many see this user-activated soft fork (UASF) as a pivotal moment in Bitcoin’s history. The philosophy underpinning the event was that users controlled the network, not miners. The event not only illustrated the balance of power within Bitcoin's network, but also calmed suspicions that parties such as miners, businesses, or Bitcoin Core developers, controlled Bitcoin.
Learn More: Bitcoin Governance Unpacking Bitcoin's Social Contract Who Controls Bitcoin Core? Bitcoin Miners Beware: Invalid Blocks Need Not Apply
The new pages also aggregate the latest news, exchange data, metrics and downloaded price data. Check it out and let us know what you think!
https://messari.io/asset/bitcoin/news
https://messari.io/asset/bitcoin/exchanges
https://messari.io/asset/bitcoin/metrics
https://messari.io/asset/bitcoin/historical
submitted by messaricrypto to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Github is backing up the codebases for Bitcoin Core and Ethereum under the Arctic ice in Svalbard - The Block

Github is backing up the codebases for Bitcoin Core and Ethereum under the Arctic ice in Svalbard - The Block submitted by trontrxripple to ethereum [link] [comments]

Github is backing up the codebases for Bitcoin Core and Ethereum under the Arctic ice in Svalbard

Github is backing up the codebases for Bitcoin Core and Ethereum under the Arctic ice in Svalbard submitted by serenity2021 to ethtrader [link] [comments]

04-01 18:34 - 'Github is backing up the codebases for Bitcoin Core and Ethereum under the Arctic ice in Svalbard - The Block' (theblockcrypto.com) by /u/infinite_dendrite removed from /r/Bitcoin within 3-13min

Github is backing up the codebases for Bitcoin Core and Ethereum under the Arctic ice in Svalbard - The Block
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: infinite_dendrite
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Github is backing up the codebases for Bitcoin Core and Ethereum under the Arctic ice in Svalbard - The Block

Github is backing up the codebases for Bitcoin Core and Ethereum under the Arctic ice in Svalbard - The Block submitted by cryptoallbot to cryptoall [link] [comments]

@binance: RT @BinanceAcademy: Who can contribute to #bitcoin? Anyone can. To demonstrate this, we put together a visualization of the Bitcoin Core developments on Github using Gource https://t.co/8Acvdqo4gv

@binance: RT @BinanceAcademy: Who can contribute to #bitcoin? Anyone can. To demonstrate this, we put together a visualization of the Bitcoin Core developments on Github using Gource https://t.co/8Acvdqo4gv submitted by rulesforrebels to BinanceTrading [link] [comments]

Banned from /r/bitcoinclassic (the fake one) for pointing out their misappropriation

I was just banned from /bitcoinclassic for posting the following comment to a thread titled "Bitcoin Classic Source Code" which linked to Bitcoin Core's github (github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin).
My comment was:
This post's title is misleading. The link points to the Bitcoin Core code, not the Bitcoin Classic code:
"Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree"
Unless of course Core is renaming itself to Classic now.
I wonder why the mod smartfbrankings would mislead readers in this sub in this way.
smartfbrankings replied to my comment with a comment stating that Bitcoin Classic's code was identical to Core's for now, and that if Core did a "controversial hard fork" he would fork the Core code and call it Classic:
Currently Bitcoin Classic's code is identical to Bitcoin Core. In the event that Bitcoin Core promotes a contentious hard fork, the source code will be forked to preserve the classic mode of Bitcoin. (source: https://np.reddit.com/BitcoinClassic/comments/409alj/bitcoin_classic_source_code/cyswxmx)
When contacting the mods to explain the reasoning for my ban, they first changed the URL linked to by the post to https://www.reddit.com/domain/github.com/, and then took the sub private.
Subsequently, I received a mod mail stating the reason:
"Because you are not welcome to post there."
I am planning to contact the reddit admins to inform them of this subreddit squatting behaviour by /bitcoinclassic mods smartfbrankings and Theymos.
It serves no useful purpose other than to interfere with actual development of the Bitcoin software.
Screenshot of topic before privatization: http://imgur.com/VH71hBW
submitted by LovelyDay to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Core : Release v0.16.1 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub

Bitcoin Core : Release v0.16.1 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub submitted by Thinkmoreaboutit to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: btc posts from 2019-05-28 to 2019-06-07 10:40 PDT

Period: 10.34 days
Submissions Comments
Total 850 14116
Rate (per day) 82.22 1245.55
Unique Redditors 440 1828
Combined Score 26564 50495

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 3690 points, 33 submissions: MemoryDealers
    1. Brains..... (420 points, 94 comments)
    2. The first trade has already happened on Local.bitcoin.com! (193 points, 67 comments)
    3. China is already leading the way with the most trades done on local.bitcoin.com, followed by India. We really are helping free the world! (192 points, 58 comments)
    4. More than 100 BCH has been raised in just a few days to help support BCH protocol development! (180 points, 63 comments)
    5. The Bitcoin Cash Protocol Development Fund has already raised more than 10% of its goal from 467 separate transactions!!! (180 points, 58 comments)
    6. Local.bitcoin.com (159 points, 80 comments)
    7. The BCH miners are good guy heroes! (152 points, 161 comments)
    8. The Bitcoin.com YouTube channel just pased 25K subscribers (147 points, 19 comments)
    9. Ways to trigger a BTC maximalist: Remind them that because they didn't increase the block size, fees will eventually climb to dumb levels again. This will put brakes on it's bull trend, and funnel cash into alts instead. (141 points, 107 comments)
    10. Why more and more people are switching from BTC to BCH (137 points, 193 comments)
  2. 1561 points, 20 submissions: money78
    1. "Not a huge @rogerkver fan and never really used $BCH. But he wiped up the floor with @ToneVays in Malta, and even if you happen to despise BCH, it’s foolish and shortsighted not to take these criticisms seriously. $BTC is very expensive and very slow." (261 points, 131 comments)
    2. Jonathan Toomim: "At 32 MB, we can handle something like 30% of Venezuela's population using BCH 2x per day. Even if that's all BCH ever achieved, I'd call that a resounding success; that's 9 million people raised out of poverty. Not a bad accomplishment for a hundred thousand internet geeks." (253 points, 180 comments)
    3. CEO of CoinEx: "CoinEx already add SLP token solution support. The first SLP token will list on CoinEx Soon. Also welcome apply to list SLP tokens on CoinEx." (138 points, 18 comments)
    4. "While Ethereum smart contracts have a lot more functionality than those in Bitcoin Cash, with the upcoming CashScript we've tried to replicate a big part of the workflow, hopefully making it easier for developers to engage with both of these communities. Check it out 🚀" (120 points, 35 comments)
    5. Bitcoin ABC 0.19.7 is now available! This release includes RPC and wallet improvements, and a new transaction index database. See the release notes for details. (104 points, 5 comments)
    6. Vin Armani: "Huge shout out to the @BitcoinCom wallet team! I just heard from a very authoritative source that multi-output BIP 70 support has been successfully tested and will be in a near-term future release. Now, the most popular BCH wallet will support Non-Custodial Financial Services!" (88 points, 23 comments)
    7. BSV folks: Anything legal is good...We want our coin to be legal! (79 points, 66 comments)
    8. BCH fees vs BTC fees (78 points, 85 comments)
    9. "This @CashShuffle on BCH looks awesome. The larger blocksize on BCH allows for cheap on-chain transactions. @CashShuffle leverages this in a very creative way to gain privacy. Ignoring the tribalism, it's fascinating to watch BCH vs. BTC compete in the marketplace." (77 points, 3 comments)
    10. Bitcoin Cash the best that bitcoin can be...🔥💪 (60 points, 9 comments)
  3. 1413 points, 18 submissions: Egon_1
    1. "The claim “Bitcoin was purpose-built to first be a Store of Value” is false. In this article I've posting every single instance I could find across everything Satoshi ever wrote related to store of value or payments. It wasn't even close. Payments win." (299 points, 82 comments)
    2. The Art of Rewriting History ... File this under Deception! (184 points, 69 comments)
    3. Today's Next Block Fee: BTC ($3.55) and BCH ($0.00). Enjoy! (120 points, 101 comments)
    4. Andreas Brekken: "The maxi thought leaders have a ⚡in their username but can't describe a bidirectional payment channel. Ask questions? They attack you until you submit or leave. Leave? You're a scammer....." (115 points, 11 comments)
    5. Tone Vays: "So I will admit, I did terrible in the Malta Debate vs @rogerkver [...]" (107 points, 95 comments)
    6. This Week in Bitcoin Cash (96 points, 10 comments)
    7. “There was no way to win that debate. Roger came armed with too much logic and facts.” (78 points, 1 comment)
    8. BTC supporter enters a coffee shop: "I like to pay $3 premium security fee for my $4 coffee ☕️" (64 points, 100 comments)
    9. Matt Corallo: "... the worst parts of Bitcoin culture reliably come from folks like @Excellion and a few of the folks he has hired at @Blockstream ..." (63 points, 43 comments)
    10. Angela Walch: "Is there a resource that keeps an up-to-date list of those who have commit access to the Bitcoin Core Github repo & who pays them for their work on Bitcoin? In the past, getting this info has required digging. Is that still the case? " (57 points, 5 comments)
  4. 852 points, 11 submissions: jessquit
    1. PSA: BTC not working so great? Bitcoin upgraded in 2017. The upgraded Bitcoin is called BCH. There's still time to upgrade! (185 points, 193 comments)
    2. Nobody uses Bitcoin Cash (178 points, 89 comments)
    3. Yes, Bitcoin was always supposed to be gold 2.0: digital gold that you could use like cash, so you could spend it anywhere without needing banks and gold notes to make it useful. So why is Core trying to turn it back into gold 1.0? (112 points, 85 comments)
    4. This interesting conversation between Jonathan Toomim and @_drgo where jtoomim explains how large blocks actually aren't a centralization driver (89 points, 36 comments)
    5. This Twitter conversation between Jonathan Toomim and Adam Back is worth a read (75 points, 15 comments)
    6. In October 2010 Satoshi proposed a hard fork block size upgrade. This proposed upgrade was a fundamental factor in many people's decision to invest, myself included. BCH implemented this upgrade. BTC did not. (74 points, 41 comments)
    7. what do the following have in common: Australia, Canada, USA, Hong Kong, Jamaica, Liberia, Namibia, New Zealand, Singapore, Taiwan, Caribbean Netherlands, East Timor, Ecuador, El Salvador, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, Palau, Zimbabwe (47 points, 20 comments)
    8. Core myth dispelled: how Bitcoin offers sovereignty (45 points, 65 comments)
    9. Satoshi's Speedbump: how Bitcoin's goldlike scarcity helps address scaling worries (25 points, 9 comments)
    10. Greater Fool Theory (14 points, 13 comments)
  5. 795 points, 7 submissions: BitcoinXio
    1. Erik Voorhees on Twitter: “I wonder if you realize that if Bitcoin didn’t work well as a payment system in the early days it likely would not have taken off. Many (most?) people found the concept of instant borderless payments captivating and inspiring. “Just hold this stuff” not sufficient.” (297 points, 68 comments)
    2. On Twitter: “PSA: The Lightning Network is being heavily data mined right now. Opening channels allows anyone to cluster your wallet and associate your keys with your IP address.” (226 points, 102 comments)
    3. Shocking (not): Blockstream has had a hard time getting business due to their very bad reputation (73 points, 25 comments)
    4. While @PeterMcCormack experiments with his #LightningNetwork bank, waiting over 20 seconds to make a payment, real P2P #Bitcoin payments have already arrived on #BitcoinCash. (66 points, 94 comments)
    5. This is what we’re up against. Mindless sheep being brain washed and pumping Bitcoin (BTC) as gold to try to make a buck. (56 points, 29 comments)
    6. Tuur Demeester: “At full maturity, using the Bitcoin blockchain will be as rare and specialized as chartering an oil tanker.” (54 points, 61 comments)
    7. ‪Bitcoin Cash 101: What Happens When We Decentralize Money? ‬ (23 points, 2 comments)
  6. 720 points, 2 submissions: InMyDayTVwasBooks
    1. A Reminder Why You Shouldn’t Use Google. (619 points, 214 comments)
    2. 15 Years Ago VS. Today: How Tech Scales (101 points, 53 comments)
  7. 485 points, 15 submissions: JonyRotten
    1. Cashscript Is Coming, Bringing Ethereum-Like Smart Contracts to Bitcoin Cash (96 points, 6 comments)
    2. Localbitcoins Removes In-Person Cash Trades Forcing Traders to Look Elsewhere (86 points, 26 comments)
    3. Bitcoin.com's Local Bitcoin Cash Marketplace Is Now Open for Trading (48 points, 22 comments)
    4. Report Insists 'Bitcoin Was Not Purpose-Built to First Be a Store of Value' (48 points, 8 comments)
    5. BCH Businesses Launch Development Fund for Bitcoin Cash (36 points, 1 comment)
    6. Another Aspiring Satoshi Copyrights the Bitcoin Whitepaper (31 points, 0 comments)
    7. Bitcoin Cash and SLP-Fueled Badger Wallet Launches for iOS (27 points, 0 comments)
    8. Bitcoin Mining With Solar: Less Risky and More Profitable Than Selling to the Grid (26 points, 0 comments)
    9. Former Mt Gox CEO Mark Karpeles Announces New Blockchain Startup (25 points, 25 comments)
    10. Mixing Service Bitcoin Blender Quits After Bestmixer Takedown (23 points, 7 comments)
  8. 426 points, 2 submissions: btcCore_isnt_Bitcoin
    1. Ponder the power of propaganda, Samson Mow, Adam Back and Greg Maxwell all know how import control of bitcoin is. (394 points, 98 comments)
    2. How many Bitcoin Core supporters does it take to change a light bulb? (32 points, 35 comments)
  9. 369 points, 3 submissions: where-is-satoshi
    1. Currently you must buy 11,450 coffees on a single Lightning channel to match the payment efficiency of Bitcoin BCH - you will also need to open an LN channel with at least $47,866 (230 points, 173 comments)
    2. North Queensland's Beauty Spot finds Bitcoin BCH a thing of beauty (74 points, 6 comments)
    3. Can't start the day without a BCHinno (65 points, 9 comments)
  10. 334 points, 5 submissions: AD1AD
    1. You Can Now Send Bitcoin Cash to Mobile Phones in Electron Cash Using Cointext! (132 points, 32 comments)
    2. Merchants are Dropping Multi-Coin PoS for One Cryptocurrency: Bitcoin Cash (73 points, 21 comments)
    3. A Stellar Animated Video from CoinSpice Explaining how CashShuffle Works Under the Hood! (67 points, 10 comments)
    4. If you haven't seen the "Shit Bitcoin Cash Fanatics Say" videos from Scott Rose (The Inspirational Nerd), YOU NEED TO DO IT NOWWW (50 points, 7 comments)
    5. New Video from Bitcoin Out Loud: "Can You Store Data on the Bitcoin Blockchain?" (Spoiler: Not really.) (12 points, 10 comments)
  11. 332 points, 6 submissions: eyeofpython
    1. I believe the BCH denomination is the best (in contrast to bits, cash and sats), if used with eight digits & spaces: 0.001 234 00 BCH. This way both the BCH and the satoshi amount is immediately clear. Once the value of a satoshi gets close to 1¢, the dot can simply be dropped. (112 points, 41 comments)
    2. Only after writing more BCH Script I realized how insanely usefull all the new opcodes are — CDS and those activated/added back in May '18. Kudos to the developers! (104 points, 22 comments)
    3. CashProof is aready so awesome it can formally prove all optimizations Spedn uses, except one. Great news for BCH smart contracts! (51 points, 6 comments)
    4. Proposal for a new opcode: OP_REVERSE (43 points, 55 comments)
    5. My response on your guy's critisism of OP_REVERSE and the question of why the SLP protocol (and others) don't simply switch to little endian (20 points, 25 comments)
    6. random post about quantum physics (both relevant and irrelevant for Bitcoin at the same time) (2 points, 11 comments)
  12. 322 points, 6 submissions: unitedstatian
    1. BCH is victim to one of the biggest manipulation campaigns in social media: Any mention of BCH triggered users instantly to spam "BCASH".. until BSV which is a BCH fork and almost identical to it pre-November fork popped out of nowhere and suddenly social media is spammed with pro-BSV posts. (131 points, 138 comments)
    2. LocalBitcoins just banned cash. It really only goes to show everything in the BTC ecosystem is compromised. (122 points, 42 comments)
    3. The new narrative of the shills who moved to promoting bsv: Bitcoin was meant to be government-friendly (33 points, 138 comments)
    4. Hearn may have been the only sober guy around (21 points, 29 comments)
    5. PSA: The economical model of the Lightning Network is unsound. The LN will support different coins which will be interconnected and since the LN tokens will be transacted instead of the base coins backing them up their value will be eroded over time. (14 points, 8 comments)
    6. DARPA-Funded Study Looks at How Crypto Chats Spread on Reddit (1 point, 0 comments)
  13. 313 points, 8 submissions: CreativeName44
    1. Venezuela Hidden Bitcoin Cash paper wallet claimed with 0.17468 BCH! Congrats to the one who found it! (80 points, 0 comments)
    2. Alright BCH Redditors, Let's make some HUGE noise!! Announcing The NBA finals Toronto Raptors Hidden BCH Wallet!! (60 points, 9 comments)
    3. FindBitcoinCash gaining traction around the world - Calling out to Bitcoin Cashers to join the fun!! (41 points, 0 comments)
    4. The Toronto Raptors Bitcoin Cash Wallet has been hidden: Address qz72j9e906g7pes769yp8d4ltdmh4ajl9vf76pj0v9 (PLS RT - Some local media tagged on it) (39 points, 0 comments)
    5. This is the next BitcoinCash wallet that is going to be hidden, hopefully REALLY soon! (36 points, 13 comments)
    6. Bitcoin Cash Meetups From Around the World added to FindBitcoinCash (25 points, 0 comments)
    7. FindBitcoinCash Wallets in other languages English/Spanish/Lithuanian/Swedish/Korean (20 points, 18 comments)
    8. Thank you for a great article!! (12 points, 0 comments)
  14. 312 points, 1 submission: scriberrr
    1. WHY? (312 points, 49 comments)
  15. 311 points, 4 submissions: Anenome5
    1. Libertarian sub GoldandBlack is hosting a free, live online workshop about how to setup and use Electron Cash on Sat 1st June via discord, including how to use Cashshuffle, with a Q&A session to follow. All are invited! (119 points, 40 comments)
    2. For anyone who still hasn't seen this, here is Peter Rizun and Andrew Stone presenting their research on how to do 1 gigabyte blocks, all the way back in 2017 at the Scaling Bitcoin Conference. The BTC camp has known we can scale bitcoin on-chain for years, they just don't want to hear it. (92 points, 113 comments)
    3. @ the trolls saying "No one uses Bitcoin Cash", let's look at the last 60 blocks... (72 points, 84 comments)
    4. Research Reveals Feasibility of 1TB Blocks, 7M Transactions per Second (28 points, 22 comments)
  16. 293 points, 2 submissions: BeijingBitcoins
    1. /Bitcoin mods are censoring posts that explain why BitPay has to charge an additional fee when accepting BTC payments (216 points, 110 comments)
    2. Meetups and adoption don't just happen organically, but are the result of the hard work of passionate community members. There are many others out there but these girls deserve some recognition! (77 points, 9 comments)
  17. 282 points, 1 submission: EddieFrmDaBlockchain
    1. LEAKED: Attendee List for Buffet Charity Lunch (282 points, 98 comments)
  18. 273 points, 4 submissions: HostFat
    1. Breakdown of all Satoshi’s Writings Proves Bitcoin not Built Primarily as Store of Value (159 points, 64 comments)
    2. Just to remember - When you are afraid that the market can go against you, use the state force. (48 points, 5 comments)
    3. CypherPoker.JS v0.5.0 - P2P Poker - Bitcoin Cash support added! (35 points, 3 comments)
    4. Feature request as standard for all bch mobile wallets (31 points, 12 comments)
  19. 262 points, 3 submissions: CaptainPatent
    1. Lightning Network capacity takes a sudden dive well below 1k BTC after passing that mark back in March. (97 points, 149 comments)
    2. Yeah, how is it fair that Bitpay is willing to eat a $0.0007 transaction fee and not a $2+ transaction fee?! (89 points, 59 comments)
    3. BTC Fees amplified today by last night's difficulty adjustment. Current (peak of day) next-block fees are testing new highs. (76 points, 59 comments)
  20. 262 points, 1 submission: Badrush
    1. Now I understand why Bitcoin Developers hate on-chain solutions like increasing block sizes. (262 points, 100 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. jessquit (2337 points, 242 comments)
  2. LovelyDay (1191 points, 160 comments)
  3. Ant-n (1062 points, 262 comments)
  4. MemoryDealers (977 points, 62 comments)
  5. jtoomim (880 points, 108 comments)
  6. 500239 (841 points, 142 comments)
  7. jonald_fyookball (682 points, 86 comments)
  8. ShadowOfHarbringer (672 points, 110 comments)
  9. money78 (660 points, 41 comments)
  10. playfulexistence (632 points, 76 comments)
  11. Bagatell_ (586 points, 72 comments)
  12. Big_Bubbler (552 points, 196 comments)
  13. homopit (551 points, 79 comments)
  14. Anenome5 (543 points, 130 comments)
  15. WippleDippleDoo (537 points, 111 comments)
  16. MobTwo (530 points, 52 comments)
  17. FalltheBanks3301 (483 points, 87 comments)
  18. btcfork (442 points, 115 comments)
  19. chainxor (428 points, 71 comments)
  20. eyeofpython (425 points, 78 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. A Reminder Why You Shouldn’t Use Google. by InMyDayTVwasBooks (619 points, 214 comments)
  2. Brains..... by MemoryDealers (420 points, 94 comments)
  3. Ponder the power of propaganda, Samson Mow, Adam Back and Greg Maxwell all know how import control of bitcoin is. by btcCore_isnt_Bitcoin (394 points, 98 comments)
  4. WHY? by scriberrr (312 points, 49 comments)
  5. "The claim “Bitcoin was purpose-built to first be a Store of Value” is false. In this article I've posting every single instance I could find across everything Satoshi ever wrote related to store of value or payments. It wasn't even close. Payments win." by Egon_1 (299 points, 82 comments)
  6. Erik Voorhees on Twitter: “I wonder if you realize that if Bitcoin didn’t work well as a payment system in the early days it likely would not have taken off. Many (most?) people found the concept of instant borderless payments captivating and inspiring. “Just hold this stuff” not sufficient.” by BitcoinXio (297 points, 68 comments)
  7. LEAKED: Attendee List for Buffet Charity Lunch by EddieFrmDaBlockchain (282 points, 98 comments)
  8. Now I understand why Bitcoin Developers hate on-chain solutions like increasing block sizes. by Badrush (262 points, 100 comments)
  9. "Not a huge @rogerkver fan and never really used $BCH. But he wiped up the floor with @ToneVays in Malta, and even if you happen to despise BCH, it’s foolish and shortsighted not to take these criticisms seriously. $BTC is very expensive and very slow." by money78 (261 points, 131 comments)
  10. Jonathan Toomim: "At 32 MB, we can handle something like 30% of Venezuela's population using BCH 2x per day. Even if that's all BCH ever achieved, I'd call that a resounding success; that's 9 million people raised out of poverty. Not a bad accomplishment for a hundred thousand internet geeks." by money78 (253 points, 180 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 109 points: mossmoon's comment in Now I understand why Bitcoin Developers hate on-chain solutions like increasing block sizes.
  2. 104 points: _degenerategambler's comment in Nobody uses Bitcoin Cash
  3. 96 points: FreelanceForCoins's comment in A Reminder Why You Shouldn’t Use Google.
  4. 94 points: ThomasZander's comment in "Not a huge @rogerkver fan and never really used $BCH. But he wiped up the floor with @ToneVays in Malta, and even if you happen to despise BCH, it’s foolish and shortsighted not to take these criticisms seriously. $BTC is very expensive and very slow."
  5. 91 points: cryptotrillionaire's comment in The Art of Rewriting History ... File this under Deception!
  6. 87 points: tjonak's comment in A Reminder Why You Shouldn’t Use Google.
  7. 86 points: money78's comment in Tone Vays: "So I will admit, I did terrible in the Malta Debate vs @rogerkver [...]"
  8. 83 points: discoltk's comment in "Not a huge @rogerkver fan and never really used $BCH. But he wiped up the floor with @ToneVays in Malta, and even if you happen to despise BCH, it’s foolish and shortsighted not to take these criticisms seriously. $BTC is very expensive and very slow."
  9. 79 points: jessquit's comment in Ways to trigger a Shitcoin influencer Part 1: Remind them that’s it’s very likely they got paid to shill fake Bitcoin to Noobs
  10. 78 points: PaladinInc's comment in The BCH miners are good guy heroes!
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

fight on github - /u/deadalnix (infamous bitcoinABC lead devel, known for stealing credits of Sipa's Schnorr-signatures) now does same for security fixes in Bitcoin Core

fight on github - deadalnix (infamous bitcoinABC lead devel, known for stealing credits of Sipa's Schnorr-signatures) now does same for security fixes in Bitcoin Core submitted by metalzip to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The first MAST pull requests just hit the Bitcoin Core repo on Github. Have a read of this MAST primer.

The first MAST pull requests just hit the Bitcoin Core repo on Github. Have a read of this MAST primer. submitted by windsok to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Not sure why Bitcoin Core supporters gets upset for calling BTC Bitcoin Core when even the GitHub repo names it as such in several places

Not sure why Bitcoin Core supporters gets upset for calling BTC Bitcoin Core when even the GitHub repo names it as such in several places submitted by increaseblocks to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Core (I'll let lawyers work out who they are) are clearly infringing Craig Wright's copyright. In fact they removed his copyright (in form of his pseudonym Satoshi) from BCore's source code. CSW if you are reading I think it's time for DMCA Takedown @ Github.

submitted by jim-btc to bitcoincashSV [link] [comments]

[HOWTO] Verify the signed UASF released binaries

Yesterday, a pull request was made to the bitcoin core github repository, introducing code and a flag (-bip148) allowing one to run bitcoin core with BIP148 rules, essentially the same functionality as the current UASF-Segwit:0.3 client, but with a set-able flag that is off by default.
This is the second pull request of its kind, after the first failed to receive support (on by default and no option to set as off) and it seems like this one does fair better and might even be eventually merged and shipped at some point.
There are probably folks who would like to run the UASF client but are concerned about binaries from unknown sources, and who will possibly run the Core binary with the -bip148 flag if the software allowed. It's important to realize that in this case, such concerns are not justified, and that the UASF-Segwit:0.3 client is vetted and reviewed as much as Core software, and it's as safe to run as binary release of Core, if you already trust the same source and people who sign it.
Usually, when Core software is released, a file named SHA256SUM.asc is published as well as the maintainter's public key (in Core's case, it's Wladimir). The SHA256SUM.asc file contains hashes of packaged releases to various operating systems, and a signature signing those hashes, certifying that if you have a file who's hash matches the one mentioned in the signed SHA256SUM.asc file, then this is the actual one that was released by Core.
The UASF client is built on top of core, using very minimal (though significant in spirit) changes which have already been reviewed by many developers, and it is known not to be malicious in code.
The released binaries unfortunately do not have signed SHA256SUM.asc file, but we are still able to verify that the code used in building the release is the same one that has been reviewed on github by many eyes. We can do this by validating the gitian build results and comparing them to the released packages' hashes.
The gitian build process is clever in the sense that it is deterministic, and for anyone who runs the process, the results should be the same if nothing is changed in the code or in the operating system used to build the code into a binary. The results are also signed by the person doing the process, so as more people run the process and sign it, we can be sure that what we get as a package matches what we should expect if we build it ourselves.
For the UASF client, there are already 3 builders and signers who also regularly sign the Core gitian build, with one actually being Wladimir, so if you already run Core, you should have no issue trusting the same signer to run the UASF release after verifying the gitian build results.
You'll need some program like sha256sum to get the SHA256 hash of files, and PGP software. I will be using gpg.
Files you'll need :
The binaries applicable for your operating system from [removed (self moderated)- see the official website]
I will use bitcoin-0.14.1-bip148_segwit0.3-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.gz for this example, since this is what I run.
A builder's public key file
Any will do but I will use the first one for this example, since essentially it's the same one that signs the Core releases.
Your build of choice's gitian build .assert and signature .sig files
You'll need to get the pair that matches the key from the previous step. For me, that would be the first pair.

With all 3 files in one directory, we start by hashing the downloaded packaged release
Hash the archive
$ sha256sum bitcoin-0.14.1-bip148_segwit0.3-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.gz 16309ad82fad310937986a7041bdd251a7891ed1b8ccac5fa6ef869c10c89259 bitcoin-0.14.1-bip148_segwit0.3-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.gz 

Verify that this hash exist in the build log output for this arcive
$ grep 16309ad82fad310937986a7041bdd251a7891ed1b8ccac5fa6ef869c10c89259 bitcoin-linux-0.14-build.assert 16309ad82fad310937986a7041bdd251a7891ed1b8ccac5fa6ef869c10c89259 bitcoin-0.14.1-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.gz 
Here we see that the file was renamed. This is not important, since the content remained the same.

Verify the key
$ gpg --keyid-format LONG  sub 2048F69705ED890DE427 2011-08-24 
Look for 7481 0B01 2346 C9A6 on http://laanwj.github.io/about/ for example (the last 8 bytes of the full length key)

Convert the key into a similar format which can be used on the fly (for simplicity, so we don't have to walk through creating a keychain)
$ gpg --dearmor laanwj-key.bin 
This will produce no output, but a new file will be created named laanwj-key.bin. This is the same key in a different format that gpg can also verify.

Verify the signature over the gitian build using the public key and signature
$ gpg --no-default-keyring --keyring ./laanwj-key.bin --verify ./bitcoin-linux-0.14-build.assert.sig gpg: assuming signed data in `./bitcoin-linux-0.14-build.assert' gpg: Signature made Mon 24 Apr 2017 11:57:58 AM IDT using RSA key ID 2346C9A6 gpg: Good signature from "Wladimir J. van der Laan " gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. Primary key fingerprint: 71A3 B167 3540 5025 D447 E8F2 7481 0B01 2346 C9A6 
Note the 3rd line, the signature is valid. The 4th and 5th line only warn us that we never suggested trust in the key to gpg itself, and the last line is Wladimir's full key as we saw from his website.
At this point, we should be convinced that the file we have was indeed the same one built and signed by the key, so it should be safe to run and use.
Hopefully this reduces concern, and we could have more participants running UASF binaries today, which they are safe to replace to a new Core release should it be shipped with the BIP148 code.

UASF

submitted by moosapor to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Core v0.16.0rc3! 2 issues left https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/30

Bitcoin Core v0.16.0rc3! 2 issues left https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/30 submitted by pabou to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The fact that a Core dev helped fix a bug in BCH shows that Core devs are also BCH devs, and the the Core community's arguments about github commits are weakened if not completely null and void. As Bitcoin Cash gains dominance, more and more Bitcoin devs will be coming over to work on it.

I would also like to point out that chain splitting bugs have been common on Bitcoin throughout its history, with a 51 block chain split in 2010 and a 24 block chain splot in 2013. So don't believe the FUD that BCH was going to die unless Core saved us.
submitted by cryptorebel to btc [link] [comments]

Jonas Schnelli: "Bitcoin Core 2016 517 Github contributors 47 Git contributors 1’637 commits ~4.5/day 1’563 PRs created 15’208 Github comments ~41/day"

Jonas Schnelli: submitted by a56fg4bjgm345 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin GitHub History Visualization - Multiple Projects (Jan 2015) Forking BITCOIN CODE to own ALT COIN - Creating MegaCoin ... Compile Bitcoin's source code (0.13) Bitcoin GitHub History Visualized - Jenkins Palladio Andreas Antonopoulos on Bitcoin Core, Multisignature Security, and the Justice of Decentralization

Bitcoin Core . The base of a sovereign Bitcoin node is a fully validating Bitcoin client. We are using Bitcoin Core, the reference implementation, but not the only option available. This application will download the whole blockchain from other peers and validate every single transaction that ever happened. After validation, the client can check all future transactions whether they are valid ... Development discussion takes place on GitHub and the bitcoin-dev mailing list. Less formal development discussion happens on irc.freenode.net #bitcoin-core-dev (web interface, logs). To report an issue, please see the bug reporting page. Code Review. Bitcoin Core is security software that helps protect assets worth billions of dollars, so every code change needs to be reviewed by experienced ... Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree. Contribute to bitcoin/bitcoin development by creating an account on GitHub. Bitcoin Core is programmed to decide which block chain contains valid transactions. The users of Bitcoin Core only accept transactions for that block chain, making it the Bitcoin block chain that everyone else wants to use. For the latest developments related to Bitcoin Core, be sure to visit the project’s official website. Bitcoin Core activity 2019-2020. Among the more active contributors in code review and commits since beginning to contribute in March 2019. #19 all-time of the Bitcoin Core contributors with 183 commits merged into Bitcoin Core and a primary focus on code review.

[index] [28102] [48930] [43566] [28582] [18902] [20722] [30231] [14935] [34249] [16741]

Bitcoin GitHub History Visualization - Multiple Projects (Jan 2015)

Searching for Bitcoins in GitHub repositories with Google BigQuery - Duration: 4:28. LiveOverflow Recommended for you. 4:28. Creating a blockchain with Javascript (Blockchain, ... Hey guys it's Jason with a video on the update to the bitcoin core, version 0.9.3. This is a minor update, but in the video I talk about what I consider the four major changes and their impact. Watch live: https://ivanontech.com/live Bitcoin GitHub History Visualization - Multiple Projects (Jan 2015) - Duration: 5 ... Bitcoin Core Recommended for you. 3:37. Theme from Palladio by Karl Jenkins . - Duration: 3:08. Musicman Doug ... This week's guest Andreas Antonopolous is a leading cryptocurrency expert, the author of "Mastering Bitcoin" author, co-host on Let's Talk Bitcoin, and founder of Third Key Solutions. Hear the ...

#