📅 Original date posted:2013-06-27
📝 Original message:I missed Greg's point on confirmations.
It is definitely a challenge to explain/ visualize both:
+ has the transaction propagated the network ?
and
+ it it confirmed/ buried in a block ?
when those words probably don't mean much to
the intended audience.
The transaction status icons I *think* do it
(explained here:
https://multibit.org/en/help/v0.5/help_transactions.html).
It basically boils down to:
1) triangle or square : bad.
2) filling circle : good
3) tick mark : great.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013, at 08:40 PM, Jim wrote:
> RE: 141.101.113.245
>
> http://whois.domaintools.com/141.101.113.245
> gives it as CloudFlare - I suspect it is protecting
> Mt Gox when we make our get for currency ticker info.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013, at 08:18 PM, Jim wrote:
> > A few replies, in order of point raised:
> >
> > Jeff:
> > Arguments against multibit default:
> > * Less testing, field experience on desktop
> >
> > Yes this is true - downloads of multibit have typically been around
> > 1/7th to 1/5th of bitcoin-QT downloads. It helps of course that
> > the bitcoinj networking/ object model is also used by Andreas
> > as you note.
> >
> >
> > Greg:
> > I think Mike has squashed the deadlocking problems with reentrant
> > locks (primarily in the Wallet). I haven't seen one in at least a month.
> >
> > We discussed proxy support on the bitcoinj mailing list a while ago
> > and at the time the stumbling block was the Java library used for
> > the networking (Netty) did not support it. Mike or Miron would
> > know better than I if this is still the case.
> >
> > Change address behaviour will improve significantly when HD
> > wallet support goes into multibit/ bitcoinj (I am hoping to get my
> > bit done over the summer). Matija Mazi has been working on a
> > Java impl of HD wallets so it is coming down the pipe but
> > there is a lot to do yet.
> >
> > Connections out from MultiBit are:
> > + 4 bitcoind nodes on port 8333
> > + multibit.org (188.138.113.201) for help, current version info
> > (and probably more in future)
> > + the currency ticker will make HTTP gets to the source of
> > whichever exchange(s) you have set up e.g MtGox, CampBX.
> > This calls should disappear if you switch the currency conversion
> > and ticker off.
> >
> > I think that is all the connections out I make.
> >
> > Mainly due to the exchanges abruptly changing their APIs and
> > breaking things we are planning to put in intermediate
> > "Exchange Data Provider" servers. Tim Molter is working on this
> > in his XChange project. That will enable us to patch the server
> > when things change and the multibits in the field won't be
> > affected. There will probably be a couple of these initially
> > for redundancy.
> >
> > Alex: Yes I think most users migrate to blockchain.info or,
> > more recently coinbase.com. They are both good wallets
> > but I'd like to keep Bitcoin as P2P as possible.
> >
> > Luke-Jr
> > I think you are right here on the number of full nodes versus
> > SPV nodes.
> > I don't think we even know yet what are the working ratios of
> > full nodes to SPV nodes. I haven't seen anybody do any
> > analysis on this.
> >
> > I doubt multibit will ever participate in the Bitcoin network
> > other than as an SPV client. All the optimisation is to reduce
> > data traffic - it is effectively a mobile wallet that happens to
> > live on a desktop. It is not really intended to be more than
> > "a wallet for regular people to store and spend their bitcoin".
> >
> > In English the nomenclature for direction of the transactions
> > is: "Sent to" and "Received with". To be honest I
> > haven't transliterated the localisation files to check other
> > language packs but the localisers are pretty good in my
> > experience.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013, at 07:41 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Luke-Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, June 27, 2013 5:30:21 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > >> * Very real possibility of an overall net reduction of full nodes on P2P
> > > >> network
> > > > Even a reduction of *nodes at all*, as I've never seen a listening bitcoinj or
> > > > MultiBit node. :/
> > > > Jim, will MultiBit be adding p2p listening support?
> > >
> > > Without validation listening isn't currently very useful. :( Maybe it
> > > could be somewhat more with some protocol additions.
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
> > >
> > > Build for Windows Store.
> > >
> > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > > Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
> >
> > --
> > https://multibit.org Money, reinvented
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
> >
> > Build for Windows Store.
> >
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
> --
> https://multibit.org Money, reinvented
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>
> Build for Windows Store.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--
https://multibit.org Money, reinvented
Jim [ARCHIVE] /
npub1a9…lc2j9
2023-06-07 15:03:59
in reply to nevent1q…vrvj
Author Public Key
npub1a9uelw8hswrmps0ayl2dzkh625xjznd5glvqrkhpxngdzupjw8kqqlc2j9Published at
2023-06-07 15:03:59Event JSON
{
"id": "940ff10160b660a70831d0eb0d6fff34226fed97ab53f1a407138448014bdaa3",
"pubkey": "e9799fb8f78387b0c1fd27d4d15afa550d214db447d801dae134d0d1703271ec",
"created_at": 1686150239,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"5ec662796ac6f7c2f8d4618ee0bafe23cd8003de44ad7e1121634fb73b588358",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"d61ddb7fd962363ef6eb8f9d2d62e47fce58f845a6bb2e89c88193b4d50b7104",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"e9799fb8f78387b0c1fd27d4d15afa550d214db447d801dae134d0d1703271ec"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-06-27\n📝 Original message:I missed Greg's point on confirmations.\nIt is definitely a challenge to explain/ visualize both:\n+ has the transaction propagated the network ?\nand\n+ it it confirmed/ buried in a block ?\n\nwhen those words probably don't mean much to\nthe intended audience.\n\nThe transaction status icons I *think* do it\n(explained here:\nhttps://multibit.org/en/help/v0.5/help_transactions.html).\n\nIt basically boils down to:\n1) triangle or square : bad.\n2) filling circle : good\n3) tick mark : great.\n\n\nOn Thu, Jun 27, 2013, at 08:40 PM, Jim wrote:\n\u003e RE: 141.101.113.245\n\u003e \n\u003e http://whois.domaintools.com/141.101.113.245\n\u003e gives it as CloudFlare - I suspect it is protecting\n\u003e Mt Gox when we make our get for currency ticker info.\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e On Thu, Jun 27, 2013, at 08:18 PM, Jim wrote:\n\u003e \u003e A few replies, in order of point raised:\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Jeff:\n\u003e \u003e Arguments against multibit default:\n\u003e \u003e * Less testing, field experience on desktop\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Yes this is true - downloads of multibit have typically been around\n\u003e \u003e 1/7th to 1/5th of bitcoin-QT downloads. It helps of course that\n\u003e \u003e the bitcoinj networking/ object model is also used by Andreas \n\u003e \u003e as you note.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Greg:\n\u003e \u003e I think Mike has squashed the deadlocking problems with reentrant \n\u003e \u003e locks (primarily in the Wallet). I haven't seen one in at least a month.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e We discussed proxy support on the bitcoinj mailing list a while ago \n\u003e \u003e and at the time the stumbling block was the Java library used for \n\u003e \u003e the networking (Netty) did not support it. Mike or Miron would \n\u003e \u003e know better than I if this is still the case.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Change address behaviour will improve significantly when HD\n\u003e \u003e wallet support goes into multibit/ bitcoinj (I am hoping to get my\n\u003e \u003e bit done over the summer). Matija Mazi has been working on a \n\u003e \u003e Java impl of HD wallets so it is coming down the pipe but\n\u003e \u003e there is a lot to do yet.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Connections out from MultiBit are:\n\u003e \u003e + 4 bitcoind nodes on port 8333\n\u003e \u003e + multibit.org (188.138.113.201) for help, current version info\n\u003e \u003e (and probably more in future)\n\u003e \u003e + the currency ticker will make HTTP gets to the source of\n\u003e \u003e whichever exchange(s) you have set up e.g MtGox, CampBX.\n\u003e \u003e This calls should disappear if you switch the currency conversion\n\u003e \u003e and ticker off.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e I think that is all the connections out I make.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Mainly due to the exchanges abruptly changing their APIs and\n\u003e \u003e breaking things we are planning to put in intermediate \n\u003e \u003e \"Exchange Data Provider\" servers. Tim Molter is working on this\n\u003e \u003e in his XChange project. That will enable us to patch the server\n\u003e \u003e when things change and the multibits in the field won't be\n\u003e \u003e affected. There will probably be a couple of these initially\n\u003e \u003e for redundancy.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Alex: Yes I think most users migrate to blockchain.info or,\n\u003e \u003e more recently coinbase.com. They are both good wallets\n\u003e \u003e but I'd like to keep Bitcoin as P2P as possible.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Luke-Jr\n\u003e \u003e I think you are right here on the number of full nodes versus\n\u003e \u003e SPV nodes.\n\u003e \u003e I don't think we even know yet what are the working ratios of\n\u003e \u003e full nodes to SPV nodes. I haven't seen anybody do any \n\u003e \u003e analysis on this.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e I doubt multibit will ever participate in the Bitcoin network \n\u003e \u003e other than as an SPV client. All the optimisation is to reduce\n\u003e \u003e data traffic - it is effectively a mobile wallet that happens to\n\u003e \u003e live on a desktop. It is not really intended to be more than\n\u003e \u003e \"a wallet for regular people to store and spend their bitcoin\".\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e In English the nomenclature for direction of the transactions\n\u003e \u003e is: \"Sent to\" and \"Received with\". To be honest I \n\u003e \u003e haven't transliterated the localisation files to check other\n\u003e \u003e language packs but the localisers are pretty good in my\n\u003e \u003e experience.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e On Thu, Jun 27, 2013, at 07:41 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Luke-Jr \u003cluke at dashjr.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e On Thursday, June 27, 2013 5:30:21 PM Jeff Garzik wrote:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e\u003e * Very real possibility of an overall net reduction of full nodes on P2P\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e\u003e network\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e Even a reduction of *nodes at all*, as I've never seen a listening bitcoinj or\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e MultiBit node. :/\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \u003e Jim, will MultiBit be adding p2p listening support?\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \u003e Without validation listening isn't currently very useful. :( Maybe it\n\u003e \u003e \u003e could be somewhat more with some protocol additions.\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e \u003e \u003e This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \u003e Build for Windows Store.\n\u003e \u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \u003e http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev\n\u003e \u003e \u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e \u003e \u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e \u003e \u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e \u003e \u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e -- \n\u003e \u003e https://multibit.org Money, reinvented\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e \u003e This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e Build for Windows Store.\n\u003e \u003e \n\u003e \u003e http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev\n\u003e \u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e \u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e \u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e \u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e -- \n\u003e https://multibit.org Money, reinvented\n\u003e \n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:\n\u003e \n\u003e Build for Windows Store.\n\u003e \n\u003e http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\n\n-- \nhttps://multibit.org Money, reinvented",
"sig": "46c76dc69f2a4436b60995e4e24590e560f3120016e9f9f7ef0f93df4291fc269e19bf140e4eeeb26326e79459e5b988a93d021480e01aedd18673ec401a586b"
}