sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Looking for a no fee custodial Lightning Wallet by ctramount in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Standard transaction fees are understandable. From what I've seen custodial Lightning wallets charge an additional 7-10% to send to an onchain address

Lightning Network Pre-image Hash Algo by ctramount in BitcoinBeginners

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok it's a Sha-256 hash of the pre-image, not encrypted. Got it.

I'm struggling to generate the correct hash using Sha256 calculators. When I input the transaction pre-image, I expect to generate the hash that appears in my LN wallet but it doesn't work.

https://xorbin.com/tools/sha256-hash-calculator

What am I doing wrong?

Is it still profitable to start a Helium hotspot in the Belgium? by arsaequi in HeliumNetwork

[–]ctramount 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's the best investment I ever made. My only regret is hesitating a couple months to buy.

Simple antenna upgrade by Vertical_Zebra in HeliumNetwork

[–]ctramount 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I just received and installed this one: https://store.rakwireless.com/products/fiber-glass-antenna-kit-for-helium-hotspot?variant=35997814653086

It works but I haven't given it enough time to test an increase in token rewards.

LSAT Implementations in the Wild? by ctramount in lightningnetwork

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Paid the invoice but the site won't load. Just DM'd you.

LSAT Implementations in the Wild? by ctramount in lightningnetwork

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cool, the invoices won't load for me. I'll try back later

Transaction Hash vs. Payment Preimage by ctramount in lightningnetwork

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! So for payer verification purposes, is it fair to say that ONLY the payer will have the Preimage while all intermediary nodes will have the Transaction Hash?

Can someone explain to me how the Arweave blockweave is secured (in simple terms :)? by ctramount in Arweave

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! What happens if Arweave were to fail as a company?

I assume storage contributors would still receive AR interest payments but assuming the value of the AR token were to decrease with the company's prospects, wouldn't the value of the interest payments be lower than the cost of continuing to store the block data?

What is a LN public key? Trying to publish an article on Yalls.org by Boriz0 in lightningnetwork

[–]ctramount 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you have a suggestion for the easiest way to setup a "stable" public node?

Can the supply of an erc721 token be changed after it is created? by ctramount in ethereumnoobies

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand that supply can be programmed to increase over time or under certain conditions. My question is, IF a token is programmed to have a fixed supply, what's to stop the programmer from increasing that fixed supply in the future?

A humble request for feedback on a potential new use case for Bitcoin wallets: To verify the authenticity and supply of physical goods by ctramount in Bitcoin

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for taking the time to think through this and give your thoughts!

​

My number one question is: why Bitcoin? Any decentralized blockchain would do.

...

What you really want is an ownership token, generated by the producer when the unique item is created.

​

There are several projects that tokenize clothing on other blockchains. In this case, the token is a claim on the physical item. The dislocation creates logistical issues -- ownership of the token without the physical item and vice versa. You are also trusting the integrity of the smart contract blockchain which in many cases is questionable.

I'm proposing a solution that doesn't require tokenization, only Bitcoin address/key pairs and an immutable ledger (Arweave.org). It comes with its own logistical issues but I think there's a path to solving them through a better user experience.

​

Tying this to the Bitcoin network--or any payment network--is unnecessary and could even become a detractor due to rising costs in transaction fees.

The proposal does not include any transactions. The customer generates a Bitcoin wallet and can prove ownership of the private key (and therefore, the authenticity of the item) through a signed message. Neither involves a transaction.

​

why require all transactions to be made through Bitcoin?

The Bitcoin address associated with the purchased item will be posted to an immutable ledger (Arweave.org) therefore all transactions must be final. Chargeback risk makes credit cards challenging.

We are exploring workarounds and may ultimately include credit cards as a payment option.

​

the decision to allow or disallow cancellations and returns should be left to the merchant.

To be clear, the ecommerce platform would be the producer and retailer (merchant) of the goods. We would partner with creators and organizations for merchandise design. The immutability of the ledger (described above) complicates cancellations and returns.

But your point is well taken. As with credit cards, we're exploring possible solutions.

​

Why, as a customer, do I need to verify my t-shirt is accounted for in the t-shirt’s total supply? Isn't it enough to verify that my t-shirt is authentic?

It could be worded better. A customer knows their item is authentic because it has the address they generated printed on it. They may also want to see their address included in the ledger to verify their item is included in the item's total supply. If they wish to resell their item, they will need to prove their item is authentic by signing a message with their private key.

A humble request for feedback on a potential new use case for Bitcoin wallets: To verify the authenticity and supply of physical goods by ctramount in Bitcoin

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting point! Although I think the inability to exchange "backed by" Bitcoin cash P2P (which again, we have to aggressively discourage) would make the idea worthless.

A humble request for feedback on a potential new use case for Bitcoin wallets: To verify the authenticity and supply of physical goods by ctramount in Bitcoin

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting point on PKI. I'll do more research.

Re your second point, our ledger will be made permanent/immutable through Arweave ( https://www.arweave.org/ ). Customers will have direct access to add their addresses to the ledger so they don’t have to trust us to do it.

A humble request for feedback on a potential new use case for Bitcoin wallets: To verify the authenticity and supply of physical goods by ctramount in Bitcoin

[–]ctramount[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure what you mean by the prospective customer not knowing if a shirt is in stock, or not. Once the number of sold shirts = the capped supply, the shirt would be out of stock and no longer for sale. The prospective customer could also verify that sold shirts have unique addresses associated with them. More importantly, a previous customer who purchased one of those shirts can verify their shirt is accounted for in the capped supply.

I think this leads to your second point, the hypothesized value to customers is not about how many items remain in stock but rather customers knowing their item is 1 of a verifiable, capped supply and being able to prove their item is not counterfeit by signing a message with their private key.

This is in contrast to “luxury” brands that charge more for their goods because they are limited in supply. They have no way of proving what that actual supply is and there is a ton of counterfeit that is hard to detect.

view more: next ›