I think decentralized mixing is on the horizon and may become baked into bitcoin wallets down the line. I'm speculating based on the emergence of protocols like FairExchange and Xim http://forensics.umass.edu/pubs/bissias.wpes.2014.pdf
> - Loses accepted transactions!!! (blockchain forks, orphan blocks, etc) From a distributed database perspective the Bitcoin blockchain is broken and loses data: like a decentralized MongoDB, but slower by several orders of magnitude.
When a block is orphaned or when there is a fork, transactions are not lost, they'll always be present in the main chain. Or said another way, all miners are trying to mine the unconfirmed transactions in their mempool. If one miner ends up finding the winning block, transactions they didn't include that were included in an orphaned block are going to be mined in the next block.
What you may be referencing, though, is not "lost transactions", but rather double spends? What I said above holds true assuming no one else is trying to spend the same outputs. However, if you wait 6 confirmations (the recommended amount before you should consider a transaction "accepted"), you won't see double spends, either.
The memory pool is not consistent among nodes, and nodes are free to drop or ignore transactions as they see fit. As you say, nodes may have conflicting transactions, a.k.a. double spends. Transactions are not durable in a meaningful way until they have been included in a block.
Waiting for six confirmations is probably enough to prevent accidental reversions, but takes on average an hour, with a fair amount of variance.
I may be wrong here but assuming you're broadcasting to both networks, your transaction is valid in both XT and Core so they'd both try to add it to a block.
The only bitcoin that become unusable in one chain are those that come from a post-fork coinbase transaction.
I'd say moving and looking for employment are two very stressful things for any individual, and for Waterloo co-ops we have to do at least one of those things every 4 months. Never-mind the "deadlines and school".
As someone who went through Waterloo co-op, I consider those one of the greatest takeaways.
It's taken me a while since graduating to realize that most people - tech or otherwise - consider interviewing to be stressful and unpleasant. Waterloo ground that out of me early on, I enjoy interviewing. Going into an interview room doesn't even begin to stress me out - and that's gotten me much further career-wise than anything else.
My interviewing and job-searching ability, and my confidence in it, has given me insane leverage in the market.
I for one am glad that Waterloo's trial-by-fire job-hunt (find a job in your 1A term? sheesh) happened to me. Negotiating, interviewing, and networking are 3 skills that most people leave school knowing almost nothing about, but a Waterloo student can easily rack up 70+ interviews by the time they walk out the door, and negotiated a dozen or so offers.
I'm a big proponent of ~3 people offices as opposed to an open floor plan. There are many ways to "opt-in" to interactions:
- lunch/dinner is done in a dining area
- I invite people out for a coffee break
- I can go hangout in a common area
- I can just walk in to someone's office just like I would walk to someone's desk in an open floor plan
- I bump into people while walking down the hall, grabbing a snack from the kitchen, etc.
There's just so many ways I interact with people at the office, that making sure I'm surrounded by people I can't look away from or mute all the time is completely unnecessary.
And I don't want to have to blast music into my ears all day and wear horse blinkers just to get some continuous hours of distraction-free creative thinking done.
This is a really well article outlining how the man-on-the-side attack on Baidu is carried out. The only flaw here is the logical leap that goes from "Baidu is being hijacked" to "Baidu is being hijacked by the Chinese government"
Sure, but the Chinese government has far more sophisticated ways of taking down sites so their own citizens can't access them, and they're not afraid to use them - even against big name sites. And in fact they often do, to help local companies providing the same offerings to prosper.
The current DDoS attack just strikes me as too crude a method when they have so many other options available.
If you were going to argue that it's just a retaliation towards GitHub for hosting these projects, then once again there are others sites the government is far more concerned about and they could use DDoS to bring them down with far less publicity than what the GitHub DDoS is generating.
It just doesn't seem to make sense from either the method being used or the motivation behind the attacks.
...
(3) The complete street address need not be disclosed as required
by paragraph (1) if the vendor utilizes a private mailbox receiving
service and all of the following conditions are met: (A) the vendor
satisfies the conditions described in paragraph (2) of subdivision
(b) of Section 17538.5, (B) the vendor discloses the actual street
address of the private mailbox receiving service in the manner
prescribed by this subdivision for the disclosure of the vendor's
actual street address, and (C) the vendor and the private mailbox
receiving service comply with all of the requirements of subdivisions
(c) to (f), inclusive, of Section 17538.5.
Well, I did make my comments conditional on the allegations being true.
My only point was that the Silk Road case isn't just about the big bad government rushing after innocent people that just want to do their drugs in peace while keeping to themselves, but are caught up in the War on Drugs.
That said, if the law enforcement were forced to presume that you were innocent until convicted, they would not be able to investigate you because they would no longer be presuming that you were innocent.
The statement that I commented on makes the assumption that the admin(s) of Silk Road were doing nothing but providing a marketplace for consensual (though illegal) transactions. If the admin(s) of Silk Road were engaged in a murder-for-hire plot, then I would assume you are ok with the FBI investigating such things (though maybe I shouldn't make such assumptions). Murder-for-hire goes well beyond people just minding their own business.
Right. The trial is not where "we find out what happens." It's where the state, having already decided you suck and need to spend some time in jail, needs to prove it to a jury of your peers beyond a reasonable doubt in a formal setting where only legally obtained evidence can be used.
