Tsa Bitcoin An Allen Falschen Stellen Suchen - Crypto - 2020

12/6/14 /r/todayilearned: "...posts with views differing from the US government’s get removed or manipulated, Snowden documents show. And Reddit is currently using bots that remove posts regarding key words such as US government, NSA, Edward Snowden, Patriot Act, TSA Bitcoin, 9/11, Wiki Leaks, etc."

submitted by madfrogurt to PanicHistory [link] [comments]

I'm running for the Texas State Legislature. I support LGBT rights, pot, and net-neutrality and oppose the NSA and TSA. I also happen to be a long-time Bitcoin enthusiast. I'd love your support.

I'm running for the Texas State Legislature. I support LGBT rights, pot, and net-neutrality and oppose the NSA and TSA. I also happen to be a long-time Bitcoin enthusiast. I'd love your support. submitted by kl0 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

BitcoinMeister - Schnorr signatures increase Bitcoin's value proposition, TSA BTC fan! No Australia customs issues

BitcoinMeister - Schnorr signatures increase Bitcoin's value proposition, TSA BTC fan! No Australia customs issues submitted by Yanlii to cryptovideos [link] [comments]

TSA "saw" Bitcoin in my bag and wanted to count it. Funniest thing I've seen do far

TSA submitted by tnethacker to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

TSA "saw" Bitcoin in Travelers bag and wanted to count it.

TSA submitted by powersthatbe1 to videos [link] [comments]

Drinking in NY, friend asked why there is no Bitcoin crowdfunding set up for Federal Employees / TSA / Furlonged / etc.

He mentioned the chaos thats going on and asked why could he not give some BTC to laid off federal employees...to prove that people will take care of others if the tools are there. Air drop for federal folks that have Bitcoin wallets? Would that work? I dunno...just a drink thought in a bar.
submitted by kitsboy to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

TSA Harasses Traveler After 'Seeing Bitcoin' In His Bag

submitted by newsettler to news [link] [comments]

I am the guy running for the Texas State Legislature supporting LGBT rights, drug-reform, net-neutrality, and opposing the TSA and NSA. As a Bitcoin supporter, thank you /r/bitcoin/ for funding our new campaign billboard!

I am the guy running for the Texas State Legislature supporting LGBT rights, drug-reform, net-neutrality, and opposing the TSA and NSA. As a Bitcoin supporter, thank you /bitcoin/ for funding our new campaign billboard! submitted by kl0 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The TSA “saw” my Bitcoin and wanted to count it

The TSA “saw” my Bitcoin and wanted to count it submitted by trifith to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[OWL WATCH] Waiting for "IOTA TIME" 30;

Disclaimer: This is sort of my own arbitrary editing, so there could be some misunderstandings.
I root for the spread of good spirits and transparency of IF.
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 2:45
So why don't we just copy Avalanche? Well that's pretty simple ...
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 2:47
1. It doesn't scale very well with the amount of nodes in the network that have no say in the consensus process but are merely consensus consuming nodes (i.e. sensors, edge devices and so on). If you assume that the network will never have more than a few thousand nodes then thats fine but if you want to build a DLT that can cope with millions of devices then it wont work because of the message complexity.
2. If somebody starts spamming conflicts, then the whole network will stop to confirm any transactions and will grind to a halt until the conflict spamming stops. Avalanche thinks that this is not a huge problem because an attacker would have to spend fees for spamming conflicts which means that he couldn't do this forever and would at some point run out of funds.
IOTA tries to build a feeless protocol and a consensus that stops to function if somebody spams conflicts is really not an option for us.
3. If a medium sized validator goes offline due to whatever reason, then the whole network will again stop to confirm any transactions because whenever a query for a nodes opinion can not be answered they reset the counter for consecutive successful voting rounds which will prevent confirmations. Since nodes need to open some ports to be available for queries it is super easy to DDOS validators and again bring the network confirmations to 0.
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:05
4. Avalanche still processes transactions in "chunks/blocks" by only applying them after they have gone through some consensus process (gathered enough successfull voting rounds), which means that the nodes will waste a significant amount of time where they "wait" for the next chunk to be finished before the transactions are applied to the ledger state. IOTA tries to streamline this process by decoupling consensus and the booking of transactions by using the "parallel reality based ledger state" which means that nodes in IOTA will never waste any time "waiting" for decisions to be made. This will give us much higher throughput numbers.
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:11
5. Avalanche has some really severe game theoretic problems where nodes are incentivized to attach their transactions to the already decided parts of the DAG because then things like conflict spam won't affect these transactions as badly as the transactions issued by honest nodes. If however every node would follow this "better and selfish" tip selection mechanism then the network will stop to work at all.
Overall the "being able to stop consensus" might not be too bad since you can't really do anything really bad (i.e. double spend) which is why we might not see these kind of attacks in the immediate future but just wait until a few DeFi apps are running on their platform where smart contracts are actually relying on more or less real time execution of the contracts. Then there might be some actual financial gains to be made if the contract halts and we might see alot of these things appear (including selfish tip selection).
Avalanche is barely a top 100 project and nobody attacks these kind of low value networks unless there is something to be gained from such an attack. Saying that the fact that its live on mainnet and hasn't been attacked in 3 weeks is a proof for its security is completely wrong.
Especially considering that 95% of all stake are controlled by avalanche itself
If you control > 50% of the voting power then you essentially control the whole network and attacks can mostly be ignored
I guess there is a reason for avalanche only selling 10% of the token supply to the public because then some of the named problems are less likely to appear
📷
Navin Ramachandran [IF]어제 오후 3:21
I have to say that wtf's suggestion is pretty condescending to all our researchers. It seems heavy on the troll aspect to suggest that we should ditch all our work because iota is only good at industrial adoption. Does wtf actually expect a response to this? Or is this grand standing?
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:22
The whole argument of "why don't you just use X instead of trying to build a better version" is also a completely idiotic argument. Why did ETH write their own protocol if Bitcoin was already around? Well because they saw problems in Bitcoins approach and tried to improve it.
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:27
u/Navin Ramachandran [IF] Its like most of his arguments ... remember when he said we should implement colored coins in 2nd layer smart contracts instead of the base layer because they would be more expressive (i.e. turing complete) completely discarding that 2nd layer smart contracts only really work if you have a consensus on data and therefore state for which you need the "traceability" of funds to create these kind of mini blockchains in the tangle?
Colored coins "enable" smart contracts and it wouldnt work the other way round - unless you have a platform that works exactly like ETH where all the nodes validate a single shared execution platform of the smart contracts which is not really scalable and is exactly what we are trying to solve with our approach.
📷
Navin Ramachandran [IF]어제 오후 3:28
Always easier to criticise than build something yourself. But yet he keeps posting these inflammatory posts.
At this point is there any doubt if he is making these comments constructively?
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 3:43
If he at least would try to understand IOTAs vision ... then maybe he wouldn't have to ask things like "Why don't you just copy a tech that only works with fees"
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 4:35
u/Shaar
I thought this would only be used to 'override' finality, eg if there were network splits. But not in normal consensus
That is not correct. Every single transaction gets booked on arrival using the parallel reality based ledger state. If there are conflicts then we create a "branch" (container in the ledger state) that represents the perception that this particular double spend would be accepted by consensus. After consensus is reached, the container is simply marked as "accepted" and all transactions that are associated with this branch are immediately confirmed as well. This allows us to make the node use all of its computing ressources 24/7 without having to wait for any kind of decision to be made and allows us to scale the throughput to its physical limits. That's the whole idea of the "parallel reality based ledger state" instead of designing a data structure that models the ledger state "after consensus" like everybody else is doing it is tailored to model the ledger state "before consensus" and then you just flip a flag to persist your decision. The "resync mechanism" also uses the branches to measure the amount of approval a certain perception of the ledger state receives. So if my own opinion is not in line with what the rest of the network has accepted (i.e. because I was eclipsed or because there was a network split), then I can use the weight of these branches to detect this "being out of sync" and can do another larger query to re-evaluate my decision.(수정됨)
Also what happens in IOTA if DRNG notes would fall out, does the network continue if no new RNGs appear for a while? Or will new nodes be added sufficiently fast to the DRNG committee that no one notices?
Its a comittee and not just a single DRNG provider. If a few nodes fail then it will still produce random numbers. And even if the whole comittee fails there are fallback RNG's that would be used instead
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 4:58
And multiverse doesn't use FPC but only the weight of these branches in the same way as blockchain uses the longest chain wins consensus to choose between conflicts. So nodes simply attach their transactions to the transactions that they have seen first and if there are conflicts then you simply monitor which version received more approval and adjust your opinion accordingly.
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 5:07
We started integrating some of the non-controversial concepts (like the approval reset switch) into FPC and are currently refactoring goshimmer to support this
We are also planning to make the big mana holders publish their opinion in the tangle as a public statement, which allows us to measure the rate of approval in a similar way as multiverse would do it
So its starting to converge a bit but we are still using FPC as a metastability breaking mechanism
Once the changes are implemented it should be pretty easy to simulate and test both approaches in parallel
📷
Serguei Popov [IF]어제 오후 5:53
So the ask is that we ditch all our work and fork Avalanche because it has not been attacked in the month or so it has been up?
u/Navin Ramachandran [IF] yeah, that's hilarious. Avalanche consensus (at least their WP version) is clearly scientifically unsound.
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 9:43
u/wtf maybe you should research avalanche before proposing such a stupid idea
and you will see that what I wrote is actually true
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 9:44
paying fees is what "protects" them atm
and simply the fact that nobody uses the network for anything of value yet
we cant rely on fees making attack vectors "inattractive"
📷
Serguei Popov [IF]어제 오후 10:17
well (1.) very obviously the metastability problems are not a problem in practice,
putting "very obviously" before questionable statements very obviously shows that you are seeking a constructive dialogue 📷 (to make metastability work, the adversary needs to more-or-less know the current opinion vectors of most of the honest participants; I don't see why a sufficiently well-connected adversary cannot query enough honest nodes frequently enough to achieve that)
(2.) .... you'd need an unpredictable number every few tens/hundreds milliseconds, but your DRNG can only produce one every O(seconds).
the above assumption (about "every few tens/hundreds milliseconds") is wrong
We've had this discussion before, where you argued that the assumptions in the FPC-BI paper (incl. "all nodes must be known") are not to be taken 100% strictly, and that the results are to be seen more of an indication of overall performance.
Aham, I see. So, unfortunately, all that time that I invested into explaining that stuff during our last conversation was for nothing. Again, very briefly. The contents of the FPC-BI paper is not "an indication of overall performance". It rather shows (to someone who actually read and understood the paper) why the approach is sound and robust, as it makes one understand what is the mechanism that causes the consensus phenomenon occur.
Yet you don't allow for that same argument to be valid for the "metastability" problem in avalanche,
Incorrect. It's not "that same argument". FPC-BI is a decent academic paper that has precisely formulated results and proofs. The Ava WP (the probabilistic part of it), on the other hand, does not contain proofs of what they call results. More importantly, they don't even show a clear path to those proofs. That's why their system is scientifically unsound.
even when there's a live network that shows that it doesn't matter.
No, it doesn't show that it doesn't matter. It only shows that it works when not properly attacked. Their WP doesn't contain any insight on why those attacks would be difficult/impossible.
📷
Hans Moog [IF]어제 오후 10:56
That proposal was so stupid - Avalanche does several things completely different and we are putting quite a bit og effort into our solution to pretty much fix all of Avalanches shortcomings
If we just wanted to have a working product and dont care about security or performance then we could have just forked a blockchaib
I am pretty confident that once we are done - its going to be extremely close to the besttheoretical thresholds that DLTs will ever be able to achieve for an unsharded baselayer
​-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📷
Bas어제 오전 2:43
Yesterday I was asked how a reasonably big company no one has heard of could best move forward implementing Access for thousands of locations worldwide. (Sorry for the vagueness, it’s all confidential.) They read the article and want to implement it because it seems to fit a problem they’re currently trying to solve. Such moves will vastly increase the utility of protocols like IOTA, and is what the speculation is built on. I do not think you can overestimate what impact Access is going to have. It’s cutting out the middleman for simple things; no server or service needed. That’s huge.
So yes, I think this space will continue to grow u/Coinnave

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📷
Angelo Capossele [IF]2020.10.02.
In short: we are planning a new v0.3.0 release that should happen very soon. This version will bring fundamental changes to the structure of the entire codebase (but without additional features) so that progressing with the development will be easier and more consistent. We have also obtained outstanding results with the dRNG committee managed by the GoShimmer X-Team, so that will also be integral part of v0.3.0. After that, we will merge the Value Tangle with the Message Tangle, so to have only one Tangle and make the TSA and the orphanage easier to manage. And we are also progressing really well with Mana, that will be the focus after the merge. More or less this is what is going to happen this month.
We will release further details with the upcoming Research Status Update 📷

submitted by btlkhs to Iota [link] [comments]

TSA agents demand bag-search to look for "Bitcoins," not understanding that they're virtual.

TSA agents demand bag-search to look for submitted by GreatestInstruments to Libertarian [link] [comments]

TSA "saw" Bitcoin in my bag and wanted to count it.

TSA submitted by ayanamirs to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

TSA "saw" Bitcoin in my bag and wanted to count it.

TSA submitted by ayanamirs to Anarcho_Capitalism [link] [comments]

TSA Stops man during security checkpoint because "they saw bitcoins in his luggage" (X-post)

submitted by nevremind to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

TSA "saw" Bitcoin in my bag and wanted to count it.

TSA submitted by ayanamirs to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

First the TSA, now Bitcoin ETFs? What isn't the government shutdown ruining?

First the TSA, now Bitcoin ETFs? What isn't the government shutdown ruining? submitted by msk_ksm to CryptoCurrencies [link] [comments]

TSA "saw" Bitcoin in my bag and wanted to count it.

TSA submitted by beantheredone to videos [link] [comments]

TSA agents demand bag-search to look for "Bitcoins"

TSA agents demand bag-search to look for submitted by the-white-knight to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

DEA seized a woman's bag of cash at an airport; it was her dad's life savings [United States of America]

DEA seized a woman's bag of cash at an airport; it was her dad's life savings [United States of America] submitted by trot-trot to Libertarian [link] [comments]

TSA agents stopped a man because they "saw" bitcoin in his bag.

TSA agents stopped a man because they submitted by OnePunchFan8 to facepalm [link] [comments]

TSA "saw" Bitcoin in my bag and wanted to count it.

TSA submitted by ayanamirs to GoldandBlack [link] [comments]

Report of the TSA "looking for Bitcoin"

Report of the TSA submitted by xrandr to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Tech Review #20 : Bitcoins in India The 1 Bitcoin Show- BTC TSA story, Bitfinex damage control? Bcash split, Litecoin, Ethereum HOW TO BUY AND SELL BITCOIN FOR PROFIT. - YouTube TSA Harassment: Traveler Suspected of Carrying This Money

Evidently, the TSA has determined Bitcoin is a tangible thing. As in … you can touch it, see it and even scan it in the bags of ne’er-do-well travelers. Meet Davi Baker. Baker was allegedly ... It seems like every NH Liberty Forum I have a post about my interaction with the TSA while flying home. In 2012 I was even declared Rebel of the Week by Wesley Messamore from the Silver Underground for my cool but assertive approach. But this year has proven to be the most frightening, as well as the most cautionary for the Bitcoin community. TSA Harasses Traveler After 'Seeing Bitcoin' in His Bag. The TSA attempted to "screen" airline passenger Davi Barker for the virtual currency Bitcoin. Barker is co-founder of BitcoinNotBombs, a ... Check Bitcoin (BTC) address 1HZwkjkeaoZfTSaJxDw6aKkxp45agDiEzN balance and its transactions You can’t “see” Bitcoin. The orange shirt[ed TSA agent] said they looked like medallions or tokens. I said I didn’t understand what he was talking about, and he simply repeated, in a child ...

[index] [28061] [6415] [26524] [1046] [9889] [17378] [31184] [40551] [51342] [34454]

Tech Review #20 : Bitcoins in India

Tech Review : Crypto Start New Look in Bitcoins Browser - Duration: 4:21. TSA Tech 27 views. 4:21. Tech Review : Amazon Fraud Online Shopping in INDIA - Duration: 4:35. TSA Tech 14 views. 4:35 ... basic explanation and buying and selling bitcoin for profit. Bitcoin is still the next Bitcoin, but today I also mention Ethereum, Bcash, and Litecoin news. The 2020 halving is NOT priced int. In motion! The 2020 halving is NOT priced int. In motion! In this video Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange speaks with (this) not bombs co-founder Davi Barker about his recent experiences while traveling at the hands of the TSA. Barker provides a humorous ...

#