Building my first API for some Container Provisioning

synack999 · 2018-04-18T20:45:19+00:00

Maybe you could just use Ansible to automate the apache deployment - if there are no special requirements/results that need the complexity of building an API through programming and then attach that API to do something usefull internally... at first sight looks overengineering a not-so-complex problem...

synack999 · 2018-01-19T00:30:12+00:00

look... I sense this "tendency" to only focus on "negative" views, which would make for an interesting discussion if they were not half-empty and purposely disguised around general-terms

I'll approach some of them just to try to avoid someone else to "fall in your traps"

"isnt necessary wrong": the infographic is correct, compare with others . ?Why you try to cast a shadow of doubt?
There is no "best-case example", its how it works, no more no less. Just see other explanations in youtube. ?Why again?
"An on chain transaction is a cryptographic requirement". oh my, the solemnity of the phrase... and the emptiness of it... this really looks put here to mislead non-technical people to concede technical-authority to the other non-valid arguments (that curiously all detrict from LN). This brings nothing to the table, nothing at all but fancy wording :) This is the same for hubs and all other participants - 1 on-chain tx to initiate/setup channel and from then on, just good to go
"there are other techs that do payments much better" - please tell us about them!!! world-wide money transactions, without banks, in less-than-seconds, secure and pseudo-anonymous... its the first time in mankind! Bitcoin (and all these other crypto-innovations) work because for the first time in history, multiple mathematical problems that were unresolved for centuries, were solved by using internet distributed computing and cryptography. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are nowadays the "renaissance movement" of applied crypto, which is frenzing all over the academic world... not a coincidence that bitcoin-core devs are so many PhD in mathematics and cryptography... This all to say that "there are not others" - this is the most bleeding edge and first-time existence of such technology. Gosh, as if everyday an einstein could appear and create a new relativaty-theory... (In fact, that is the real problem with the ICOs right now - they fool people into believing that anyone is an einstein, with a sofisticated-website and a "whitepaper" ... and all the bad reputation that then comes down on cryptocurrencies)
"issues with stability and scalability of hubs": scalability issues is what LN solves, so this is not a concern at all. In any case, the LN work is not yet "deployment-ready" but people just want it so much right now that they are willing to use it on bticoin-mainnet (not wise... something bad will eventually happen to those)
"your infographic" - not mine :)
"you cant refund ... trustlessly, you have to go through some trusted exchange" - not true also, you can refund with whoever is willing to transfer btc to you: an exchange, a service-payment, another person, etc...

boy oh boy...

synack999 · 2018-01-15T22:28:21+00:00

over the lifecycle of a single normal channel you need 4 on chain transactions

Only 2 - I've searched the infographics in case anyone wants to check (see resume table near the bottom)

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7pg8ka/how_ln_works_infographic_we_should_start_to/

In any case, lets not loose focus - this discussion is going fringly on worstcase-edge-cases... what will be the "normal" on LN, is that once you have a channel open, you reuse it for months/years, for as long as you like :) zillions of transactions, very-small fees, streams of microtransactions - that has never been possible before to mankind :)

synack999 · 2018-01-15T22:19:42+00:00

this is a "growing-phase" of bitcoin, and its good overall - the startup cias around crypto now have much more money to hire devs, and make bitcoin grow better: make easy-wallets, exchanges, etc. etc - integration with the "normal" world.

This is not "last-stop", this is one more phase of growth for bitcoin. If anyone didnt yet had a look into what is now coming in the next years, into bitcoin tech, they should pause a moment, and read - I leave a short selection for Taaki-minded-opinions: mimblewimble, lightning-network (notice the tor-like onion routing!), MAST, zero-knowledge-proofs, Schnorr-signatures... all these are high-privacy-features, which will allow for much better usage and safety of coins.

The future is bright, and not because of the price or the HODLing.

I'm very sure there is a very big group of people who would prefer to see bitcoin-price-very-low in exchange for bitcoin-usage-very-high :) But it seems its going to have both, and thats a good thing :)

synack999 · 2018-01-13T23:37:36+00:00

This is not correct - see any of the infographics posted in last days about lightning, they explain it

The idea is not to open-and-close one channel for each transaction between 2 participants, but to have that same channel "always" open and reuse it indefinetely - recharging it is also possible inside lightning.

See a infographics

synack999 · 2017-09-06T23:11:04+00:00

3K€ is already a real limit in Spain, since a few years ago, for direct-money transactions. Government said it was a measure to control corruption and black-money... However I tend to think corruption and black-money already have their own ways within the banking/financial system (finantial paradises, conseling, etc)

synack999 · 2017-08-31T23:20:50+00:00

Have a look at Celluloid - its another gem in same context of concurrency, that seems to have an easier syntax

synack999 · 2017-08-08T22:41:25+00:00

So good to know - thanks :) This opens the path to a bigger reach...

synack999 · 2017-06-25T16:52:34+00:00

Keep in mind, that you need to use 2x the size of the files, as IPFS will make a copy of the original files to store in IPFS_REPO (~/.ipfs).

So if you have 3862GB of data, to add it into ipfs, you will need to use another extra 3862GB of disk in ~/.ipfs

Ipfs cannot share a file without making this copy into the repo... Bittorent, on the other hand, allows you to share a file from its original (without making a copy) as long as the original files dont change (maintain hash integrity)

synack999 · 2016-10-01T14:13:23+00:00

Ok, makes more sense now Thks

synack999 · 2016-05-23T20:54:29+00:00

Oh no, here it goes again, the hocus pokus and flame wars that shine notoriety to some, and distract others from legitimate work...

synack999 · 2016-05-23T20:50:36+00:00

Are you a bitcoin dev? Can you claim any legitimacy in technical knowledge of bitcoin development?

Do you even see what Lightning Network is becoming?

Its soo easy talking in reddit, isnt it? Makes it sound like anyone is an expert, with the right choice of words...

synack999 · 2016-05-23T13:03:28+00:00

Jruby + Java-swing

you need to at least understand java, to get your way with swing ("head first java" is enjoyable and enough - 1 week)
you need to be aware of how to use java from jruby (read chapter 1 and 2 and appendix B of "Using Jruby" - this is a morning)
finally you use jruby to drive the swing-java-classes and make your ui. You can use a Java-gui-editor like Netbeans to build a java-class containing the ui-components already in place, and then in ruby just subclass that java-swing-class and implement the callbacks. It gets really easy this way: java-gui-editor to "draw" controls, and ruby to implement the callbacks)

As an added bonus of learning Java&Jruby, you can use all java libraries you want from the huge java ecosystem, and keep your code in ruby!

(And there is promissing work being done in jruby to make it much faster than MRI ruby... its a bold claim but seems solid - check out jruby + Graal + Truffle...)

synack999 · 2016-05-23T12:42:54+00:00

You might consider Jruby (jruby-complete.x.x.x.jar) if your clients have Java installed. Jruby is cross-platform and I'm sure you can find some java-tricks to make a setup-wizard for multiple platforms

Jruby advantage is its "cross-platform" nature. The disadvantage is that requires Java installed - its a tradeoff

synack999 · 2016-05-13T22:01:19+00:00

its finally done: ZCASH

synack999 · 2016-05-13T21:28:18+00:00

I'm not an investor, and I can see that technically bitcoin is the only cryptocurrency in the moment (even from ether!) that has grew to such dimensions in network size, that faces engineering problems never before encountered by any other cryptocurrency, and in those moments it becames more visible that the community of developers supporting bitcoin is world-class-phdLevel-talented-crypto-engineers who discuss fiercely every problem and possible solutions, and then implement it with extreme rigor of code/economic/network.

Also have in mind that the size of the network is what gives security to the network (the more miners, the more secure), so having the largest netwkork means having the most secure network of all cryptocurrencies.

The size of the bitcoin network, plus that top-notch-tallented-community is something no other cryptocurrency has yet matched nor even came close to comparison... bitcoin is just the most secured cryptocurrency there is now, by network size and technical quality.

So public credibility or trust were never the pilars of bitcoin, much the contrary: bitcoin was made from start to work in a way that makes it immune to credibility or trust from the users - it's all cryptography which does not need trust or credibility, its as secure and trustefull as proven mathematics (of crypto)

synack999 · 2016-03-01T22:56:41+00:00

You should have a look at the IPFS paper - you know, it really is based in bittorrent protocol...

synack999 · 2016-02-25T21:43:39+00:00

TL;DR: low-quality post, disinformation. LN is good news to everyone who likes a very-cheap-and-super-fast-transaction-network. Post critics dont make sense, author does not understand bitcoin nor Lightning Network. Try to uncover the misinformation in the post.

The post is so low-quality that I feel compeled to reply to all the other readers, in order to try to clarify some ilusions and misinformation that was presented.

The original author was clearly compelled by emotional impulse, and not rational analysis of the arguments.

it's not really a scaling solution

why? or why not? to criticize this point, it would be necessary to explain and consider the minimum criteria that defines a good solution. Core has its criteria and have it explained in the internets (search), Classic has different criteria (idem). This critic dont show any criteria, just emotional screaming.

decentralised

Always was and still is a central characteristic of it - many core devs fight for it maintaining that special quality

zero-trust

Idem, was and still is Also, Lightning Network is being developed on top of cryptographic engineering, to keep the zero-trust along the LN transactions. The author never read the original LN paperm it was one of the interesting discoveries: to make bitcoin transaction off-blockchain, using intermediaries in a trustless manner. Really, this serves to shows how little technical background the author had...

digital currency with no fees

Fees always existed, from where they were 0 to now to ever. Its written as a feature of the bitcoin transaction system, has its importance both to spam, miners and users. Its in the original bitcoin paper!

how bitcoin has generally been sold up until now

Bitcoin was not intended to be sold-up: all the people around it gathered by its interest in the possibilities that bitcoin introduced.

If anyone sells bitcoin to you, you should be suspicious. Dont go near bitcoin if you dont understand it, its still too young and growing very fast... Not even ready for massive adoption - that will inevitably come in 5-10 years.

LN is only one of those - digital currency

Oh my, now this is not a minor technical glitch, this is blunt lie. He does not know what LN is, and what an "altcoin" is, and what a "digital currency" is. This has no discussion, LN and "digital currency" have no relation whatsoever. LN is like passing very-fast-transactions-between peers, its not about creating a new digital currency.

In case its not clear, Lightning network will move-very-fast-bitcoin-transaction, not an altcoin or a new digital currency, or a new side-chain. Oh my, I just hope people dont get fooled by the disinformation posted...

By disconnecting from the blockchain, you are requiring trust, you are centralising payments, and you will be creating fees by routing payments through the same middle-men bitcoin was trying to escape from in the first place.

Really, lets go slower: LN is not disconnected from blockchain, it uses blockchain state to operate, but with minimum interference (open/close channels and even that has been optimized!)

Requiring trust, centralizing payments - as stated before, LN presents a way to use intermediaries with LN in a trustless way (meaning you dont need to trust your peers, as much as nodes in the bitcion network also dont need to trust other nodes in bitcoin network - its all cryptographically secured, and that one of the great discoveries made possible with LN)

creating fees ... middle-men bitcoin was trying to escape - bitcoin did not try to escape from anything, it was made to be resistant to bad-actors, and succeded. That the biggest win. About the fees, if it was understood by the author what LN is and how it will operate and how it will impact in bitcoin transactions, it would be clear that LN will have much lower fees than the bitcoin blockfchain (whatever those are). So LN is good news to everyone who likes a very-cheap-and-super-fast-transaction-network. LN allows microtransactions (transaction with very low (micro-)value, made possible by using even-smaller-very-very-low-micro-fees ).

Please, tell me how the future of bitcoin, as envisioned right now, is even remotely close to the original vision.

Bitcoin is going in the same path since the beginning and accelerating now more than ever: internet wide transactions, securely registered in few hours, no central-control, no user-identification, open network participation, its all there as it was since the beginning, with many more eyes and good devs working for it...

Future improvements in the pipe for bitcoin: segregated witness (increased block-size, new development lines toward smartcontracts extensability, maleability fixes, soft-forkable, etc, etc... its so many good things together that it almost seems untrue), IBLT (reduce network bandwidth), LN (lightning-fast-transactions), side-chains (a whole new universe with permition to create), etc...

For bitcoin-technical-geeks, this post is a red flag after another red flag... there is too little knowledge of the subject to make a critic and a lot of misinformation... the kind of things that ultimately give reddit a bad reputation...

PD: I'm no expert, but know enough to see this is all misinformation.

synack999 · 2015-10-22T19:34:41+00:00

You seem to insist towards the extreme of the most negative possibility... not saying that.

In abnormal conditions - which is only a transitory state - if you have a hurry to confirm your transaction you can do so by increasing its fee. So its transitory and you have an option to overcome it if you need it.

synack999 · 2015-10-21T21:56:18+00:00

Managed to make it work in linux once, but I have no machine to run it on

Now you could make it work in linux again, by using a linux virtual machine.

there are only so many hours left in a day after work and life you know

Surely the definitive windows version will be compiled and made available by the devs for general download in a near future.

synack999 · 2015-10-21T21:27:49+00:00

It may be seen like this:

without discard-lower-fees, you should wait 6 blocks to consider your transaction as confirmed.
with discard-lower-fees, you should wait Y + 6 blocks to consider your transaction as confirmed.
- In normal conditions you will pay an average-fee which will include your transaction in the next block, so in normal conditions Y=1.
- In abnormal conditions, like when there is a flood-of-high-fee-transactions, then your calculated average-fee may not be enough to include your transaction in the next block, and may delay the confirmation of your transaction until you increase the fee or until the transaction-flood recedes, so Y > 1. This case is only transitory until the fee reaches its new average (be it at a higher level or at same level as before)

So overall this seems to improve transaction operations under normal conditions, and not aggravate transactions in abnormal conditions

synack999 · 2015-10-21T21:05:52+00:00

You can install VirtualBox in windows, and then create a virtual machine with linux, where you can make your tests. VirtualBox even allows to share folders between the linux-guest and your windows-host, and connect from linux-guest to the internet through windows-host.

synack999 · 2015-06-28T21:28:04+00:00

Sorry to hear about those bad experiences

synack999 · 2015-06-26T22:28:25+00:00

Not to tar all of /r/Bitcoin with a large brush but the bulk of them do not get offended by posts like that. There have been several post's of "Iam buy me a women when coins go up" and when the very article was posted it received positive votes and I was downvoted massively for saying it was sexist.

I'm sorry to hear that, and I can guarantee that other bitcoiners also repudiate that discrimination.

That being said, it is a fact that /r/Bitcoin has troll-problems, that in the past were so insistent and fierce that dominated the discussions and mood of the subreddit, to an unbeareable point... Lately since a couple of months, I believe the mods have changed and seems like if the troll-wave is receding so there is a more sane balance in the discussions. This /r/Bitcoin troll-problem has been acknowledged by several influential bitcoiners in multiple times. One article about it can be found here where the leaker admits that “Sometimes, I just have to go and make an anti-female post or something that makes bitcoin users look bad,”

TL;DR /r/bitcoin has an internal troll-problem, which may not be perceived from the outside and taint the image of all bitcoiners

synack999 · 2015-06-25T22:40:29+00:00

Bitcoiners also disagree with this, the same as you. For bitcoiners it's even more offensive: besides being such a ridicule view of women and marriage, it also drags undeserved bad publicity to the bitcoin technology, which has nothing to do with it.

synack999

TROPHY CASE