If a random fraudster wanted to post a bunch of mysterious ECDSA signatures that the public would believe came from Bitcoin's creator, in order to disrupt the Bitcoin market, extract money from people, or otherwise convince people to listen to them. How could they do that?
@Prayank Preceding that question, Craig Wright posted a a signature that was unconnected to the message it was supposedly signing. In so far, this was a bit less hypothetical than it may sound from the way the question is phrased.
Also, it's focused on the why and how. It explains technical concepts in a lasting way, why do you think would it need to be closed?
I don't think it needs to be closed. I think I would have asked that question in a way or would have been interpreted in a way if I asked that people would vote to close it. There was a question that I deleted after seeing one vote to close it. It was related to exchanges getting hacked. I asked "what can be the incentives for an exchange to be involved in a hack as inside job", gave few examples of hacks that I suspect might be inside job. I think two people had voted to close it.
Earlier I had asked how can governments attack bitcoin. It was closed because I didn't ask simple question and gave some background details, my reasoning and things I expect. I have lot of questions but don't ask many because I think they will be closed.Example: I have a question right now related to one bitcoin project but I think few people will close it being related to programming and not bitcoin.
I think the main difference is that the question was vaguely open, but posted with an answer immediately. If Greg's question had been posted alone, it might have been closed as well.
A better question might have been. Recently someone posted <signature> in conjunction with <blog post>. How can we evaluate whether the signature proves the claims made?
I don't know if it makes you feel any better, but I have six deleted questions as well.
I had asked a question earlier about compressing the transaction hex as it was used in a project that involved sending text messages (160 characters limit per message):
Compress transaction hex string
So I have used a different approach and here's the project details: https://github.com/prayank23...
@Prayank Technically, that is almost definitely a better fit for stackoverflow - its connection to Bitcoin is simply incidental, as the data being encoded is a transaction - the actual problem itself is an implementation/programming error, and would be there even if you were encoding arbitrary data
@Prayank The line between on and off topic can be blurry, but generally communities will try to enforce some form of consistency for a given point in time - you'll find many older questions here that are outright off topic, which were evaluated under a different criteria, or which toe the line but are allowed due to being exceptionally interesting or relevant to the space without being explicitly within the scope
Consider words in below code is a list of words mentioned here: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Frequency_lists/Contemporary_poetry
N = len(words)
def encode(message):
out = []
for i in range(len(message) / 8):
word = message[8 * i:8 * i + 8]
x = int(word, 16)
...
@Prayank your answer on this question is good (bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/99704/…), but just a heads up that "My transaction isn't getting confirmed!?" is a question that gets asked here A LOT, so its good to close it as a duplicate, pointing back to a single canonical question
I've voted to close the question that you answered as duplicate, but you should consider copying your answer to that canonical question: bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/9046/…
Actually, your answer would be a good contribution, none of the other answers point to any mempool visualizations, which I think are very helpful in understanding the situation. In fact, a bunch of the answers just point to 'transaction accelerators', which IMO are basically service recommendations that would be borderline off-topic
Cool. Yeah could have closed as duplicate and gave the link. It was mentioned that transaction isn't visible in block explorer and I had read few tweets about mempool today so just felt like helping with the issue and wrote everything.
If a random fraudster wanted to post a bunch of mysterious ECDSA signatures that the public would believe came from Bitcoin's creator, in order to disrupt the Bitcoin market, extract money from people, or otherwise convince people to listen to them. How could they do that?
Consider words in below code is a list of words mentioned here: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Frequency_lists/Contemporary_poetry
N = len(words)
def encode(message):
out = []
for i in range(len(message) / 8):
word = message[8 * i:8 * i + 8]
x = int(word, 16)
...
