A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
261–270 of 293 posts
Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#262Implementing things from scratch is probably the ultimate test of thorough understanding. Chapeau! On another note I am amused that Mr. Karphathys name describes exactly what he is doing in his day job.
Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#263Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#264Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#265Implementing things from scratch is probably the ultimate test of thorough understanding. Chapeau! On another note I am amused that Mr. Karphathys name describes exactly what he is doing in his day job.
I don't get it. What does the word "Karpathy" mean or sound like?
Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#266Implementing things from scratch is probably the ultimate test of thorough understanding. Chapeau! On another note I am amused that Mr. Karphathys name describes exactly what he is doing in his day job.
I don't get it. What does the word "Karpathy" mean or sound like?
Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#267Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no bitcoin needed for this at all its does not even move on the chain for the transfer. Both sides are Strike entities all this does is use bitcoin as a bridge for USD to USD which is completely pointless as both sides are USD. You could just buy USDT (or another stabelcoin) and send it there. Its a different story if there is actually a switch in currency needed. There is this famous and from bitcoin people…
Please somebody explain why it's downvoted. Ignoring digression about XRP, this is exactly what I read from the parent comment. Judging by the user-story above, all this talk about how BTC is being "sent" (which, as we all know, is a small lie on it's own, since unlike fiat, BTC is never really being sent anywhere) seems just to distract us from the fact that we just end up buying USDT for USD. No BTC involvement req…
>No BTC involvement required.
Totally correct. Remittance over a bridge currency only make sense under very specific conditions, which include that the input currency and the output currency are different. And a direct exchange is not possible or not cheap.
The traditional banking system does this as well, they usually use USD as bridge. To pair every currency with every currency simply isn't feasible and the low volume pairs would have no liquidity anyway. Its basically the same as with goods if you have wood but want metal you use a currency as bridge because there is no market to sell wood for metal. Now if you also have a location difference between the market where you want to sell and the mark where you want to buy then you actually can use the bridge currency to move from one market (location) to another market (location).
Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#269Does this blog entry hang Brave on Android for anyone else? Happens on two phones for me.
Re: A from-scratch tour of Bitcoin in Python
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bitcoin does not expose your public key until you spend from it. Are you sure, what about when someone sends to it?
They're correct. The blockchain just records that the funds were sent to your address. To spend the funds you have to show the public key which hashes to that address, in another transaction signed by the private key. If the sender wanted to send you a private message, they would need your public key, but that's not what transactions do.