Monthly Archives: Oktober 2020

You are browsing the site archives by month.

Bitcoin avgifter skyrocket, noen transaksjoner tar dager, mulig mulig neste uke

Bitcoin (BTC) har opplevd ganske mange sammenkoblede problemer, ettersom hashraten har falt, avgiftene på det overbelastede nettverket har økt, og brukerne hevder å vente i flere dager på at transaksjonene deres skal bekreftes – noen av dem kan bli droppet av gruvearbeiderne. Imidlertid kan noe lettelse komme neste uke.

Og dette skjer på en tid da BTC samlet seg med 27% på en måned, og nesten slo USD 14 000 før de korrigerte lavere igjen (USD 13 530 kl 16:17 UTC i dag).

I mellomtiden, med det klart overbelastede nettverket, kommer imidlertid et hopp i transaksjonsgebyret

Gjennomsnittlig Bitcoin-transaksjonsgebyr 28. oktober var USD 11,67, per BitInfoCharts.com. Det toppet spesielt fra 19. oktober og klatret hele 505,5% siden den gang. Det syv dagers glidende gjennomsnittet viser et hopp på nesten 210% mellom disse to datoene, til USD 6,75.

Tilsvarende var den mediane transaksjonsavgiften den 28. oktober USD 6,88, noe som er en massiv økning fra 17. oktober-fall da nesten USD 0,6 ble registrert. Syv dagers enkelt glidende gjennomsnitt viser en økning på 223% på ti dager, til USD 3,8 registrert 28. oktober.

Median transaksjonsgebyr, USD, 7-dagers enkelt glidende gjennomsnitt

„Gebyrene bør synke når vanskeligheter med å justere tidlig i neste uke, siden blokker vil bli utvunnet oftere,“ sa Bitcoin-utvikler Matt Odell, skjønt „vi vet ikke hvor mye avgifter vil falle, hvis transaksjoner vil fullføres, og hvor lang tid det vil ta hvis de gjør det. “ Per gruvedrift BTC.com forventes vanskeligheter å falle nesten 10% på mer enn fire dager, ettersom BTC-blokkeringstiden overgikk 14 minutter mens målet for den gjennomsnittlige blokkeringstiden er 10 minutter.

Folk har kommentert på sosiale medier at transaksjonene deres ikke har blitt bekreftet i flere timer eller dager nå. Andre bemerket imidlertid at disse transaksjonene med høyere avgifter vil bli bekreftet tidligere, da disse er mer lønnsomme for gruvearbeiderne.

Jameson Lopp, Chief Technology Officer for kryptosikkerhetsspesialist Casa , kommenterte at den nylige nedgangen i hashrate, eller beregningskraften til Bitcoin-nettverket, førte til at visse Bitcoin-noder nådde sin fulle kapasitet, slik at de brukerne som har sendt laveste gebyrtransaksjoner ikke se dem bli videresendt.

Hashrate falt nesten 38% fra det høyeste punktet på 157,65 EH / s det nådde 17. oktober til 97,95 EH / s ti dager senere. Det økte imidlertid med 7% det siste døgnet. Lopp bemerket tidligere at fallet antagelig er et resultat av at kinesiske gruvearbeidere flyttet utstyr for den tørre årstiden.

Ethereum developer Virgil Griffith objects to allegations of violating sanctions

Griffith states that his blockchain talk in North Korea is based solely on publicly available information.

Virgil Griffith, the former Ethereum Foundation development researcher, filed an objection on Thursday against allegations that he should have deliberately disregarded US sanctions against North Korea. He justifies his objection by stating that the prosecution of the Southern District Court of New York cannot name a specific crime on his part.

Griffith, 37, was arrested by FBI agents on November 28, 2019 after attending an IT conference in North Korea in April that year

The prosecution then accused him of attending as a kind of service for the North Korean government through which he allegedly passed on „valuable information“ to members of the government. In addition, he took part in „talks“ on the use of blockchain technology to circumvent sanctions.

Griffith replied that the presentation he gave at the conference was merely „very general and only contained information that is publicly available anyway.“

In this regard, the question now arises for the court whether the mere planning and holding of the presentation can be interpreted as a violation of American sanctions.

In his contradiction, Griffith also claims that he was not paid to attend and that he did not sign any consulting contract. Accordingly, his lecture was not a „service“ for the North Korean government. He also sees his right to free speech protected by the American constitution.

In conclusion, Griffith argues that his presentation is protected by an exception in international law that legitimizes the sharing of „information“ and „information materials“.

So it says in his contradiction:

„If Mr. Griffith’s lecture is not classified as disseminating ‚information‘, what then?“

As Cointelegraph reported , the case divides the crypto community.

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin defended Griffith in December:

“I think what Virgil did didn’t help the North Korean government do anything bad. He gave a talk based on publicly available information about open source software. He did not impart advanced hacking expertise. […] In addition, Virgil did not derive any private advantage from participating. […] I hope that the USA will take care of the really important things and not about computer scientists giving the lectures. „

Taproot is ready, but will probably not be included in the next Bitcoin release

Developers don’t want to rush things too much

On Thursday, Bitcoin Improvement Proposals 340 to 342 were integrated into Bitcoin source code, indicating that the highly anticipated Taproot update is ready.

Taproot and Schnorr’s associated signature technology are considered the most important update for Bitcoin in the last year. This is primarily a privacy improvement for complex Bitcoin spending conditions, such as multisig transactions, timelocks, and other features based on the cryptocurrency Script language.

As Cointelegraph has reported in the past, Taproot hides any additional spending conditions other than the one that is activated. For example, a transaction can be executed immediately if all four signatories to a multisig agree, or it may take some time before funds are released if only three of the four signatories are present. Normally, an outsider will be able to identify every possible condition, but with Taproot you will only be able to see the one that has been activated.

Furthermore, thanks to Schnorr’s signatures, a purely multisig transaction can be made indistinguishable from regular transfers. It is important to note that Taproot does not introduce any changes to mixing protocols such as CoinJoin, which will remain easily distinguishable.

The initial code for Taproot was submitted for review in January, but some complications (mainly related to Schnorr signatures) required a great deal of fine-tuning.

Now the proposals have been fully verified by Bitcoin’s core developers and are ready to be included in a new client release. Pieter Wuille, the chief developer for Taproot, explained to Cointelegraph that „everything is ready, except activation.

Previously, Cointelegraph reported that reaching consensus for activation may take some time. The process can potentially take years, although Taproot is generally considered much less controversial than previous updates such as SegWit.
The process will begin as soon as the activation code is included in Bitcoin Core, allowing miners to report approval for its introduction. However, Taproot seems to have arrived at a less than ideal time for immediate activation.

Jonas Nick, researcher at Blockstream and Bitcoin Core developer, revealed to Cointelegraph that „Taproot is not yet ready for activation.

The developer explained that activation logic is generally not included in a major release, referring to the upcoming version 0.21. On Thursday, the code reached a „feature freeze“, and Taproot arrived just in time. However, only bug fixes will be added from now on. Explaining the reasons why developers are cautious, Nick said:

„Major releases may contain changes to dependencies and interfaces (e.g., RPC). Users should have the ability to soft fork the activation logic without the additional work required to be compatible with a new version“.
The logic to activate Taproot on mainnet will probably be included in a future minor version, but meanwhile Nick explained that „Taproot could be activated on something like signet or testnet if someone produced the code to do so,“ since the raw implementation is already there.

Belarusian cyber vigilantes defend fundamental freedoms against Lukashenko regime

National unrest erupted in Belarus following the 2020 presidential election.

A non-profit organization stepped in and started providing financial aid to protesters in the form of Bitcoin.

BeInCrypto contacted Cyber ​​Partisans, a hacktivist group carrying out coordinated cyber attacks against the Lukashenko government.

The Trust Project is an international consortium of news organizations based on transparency standards

“Sabotage, resistance, silence – this is about us,” says the Belarusian hacktivist group calling itself Cyber ​​Partisans.

Hacktivists are on the rise again – not the Guy Fawkes masked group known as Anonymous. These are the Cyber ​​Partisans, a resistance group driven by the fire of activism, in a spirit of “vigilante” as they wage a battle against the powers of Belarus for the liberation of Russia. people.

National unrest erupted in Belarus following the 2020 presidential election after President Alexander Lukashenko ran for a sixth consecutive term since taking office 26 years ago. He is described as „the oldest dictator in Europe“, winning with 80.23% of the vote. A public outcry ensued as citizens believed the election was rigged.

Lukashenko was again sworn in as president in an unannounced ceremony – an unusual act since presidential inaugurations are usually planned and announced in advance as important events for the state. Before the start of the elections, opposition candidate Svetlana Tikhanovskaya quickly deserted her home following the arrest of her senior officials by the police.

People gathered on the streets of the Belarusian capital, Minsk, blocking roads and sometimes chasing police vehicles from the area. Authorities responded by using water cannons and deploying riot police.

Protesters clashed with police as they voiced their dispute over the election results. The movement quickly mobilized tens of thousands of voices that marched against the state. It eventually evolved into a peaceful protest , although the security forces still managed to forcefully drive people away.

While public protests of various intensities are quite common around the world and best understood as a way to send a strong message by disenfranchised citizens. Overall, however, they can sometimes be seen as a passive form of opposition against the iron fronts of stubborn state powers.

Response from Lukachenko State: censorship

Imagine glancing at your phone and seeing no internet connectivity. This happens from time to time when someone is traveling in a rural area with little or no network coverage. Reimagine it under a different scenario such as the turn of events described above, but with an added element: an ongoing internet outage nationwide in addition to a closed mobile wireless network for most carriers.

Censorship?

On Sunday afternoon of August 9, 2020, an internet blackout occurred across the country, which occurred simultaneously with the outbreak of public unrest. Mobile phone coverage has also declined.

After a total of 61 hours, the two networks were restored on Wednesday morning. However, during those long hours, a large-scale censorship of major social media sites and popular messaging services occurred.

The Google search engine was also blocked as well as en.wikipedia.org. Telecommunications companies have also started to block access to virtual private network (VPN) services, an essential instrument to defeat censorship and protect data privacy.

In addition, at the DNS server level, the visitation of major social media platforms was also limited.

When put into perspective, deliberate Internet and mobile network outages can be an effective way to disrupt communications and prevent people from having the ability to disseminate information and engage others. .

News media with inside information warned in advance that the government planned to trigger an Internet blackout during the polls. At first, it was expected that power outages would only take place in Minsk – not nationwide.

„Once they cut Internet, it was clear that they were hiding something,“ he said Michael Klimarev, executive director of the Internet Protection Society, CyberNews. He said the internet outage was expected and not done in a professional manner.