|
Damn. I would already be happy with 1 of his bet outcomes. My faucet payout would increase extremely.
|
|
|
|
That guy really wants to lose it, doesn't he?
I guess... 00:42:14 *** fuckit (169618) [#148584193] bet 2170.97057849 BTC at 92% and won 165.18255156 BTC *** 00:43:32 *** fuckit (169618) [#148585325] bet 2336.15313005 BTC at 92% and won 177.75078975 BTC *** 00:48:31 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590355] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC *** 00:49:14 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590882] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC *** Well, let's look at it positively. If he continues like this he will lose it. Even 92% can go wrong. He just withdrew 3100 BTC. Nice winnings. Oh, damn. Well, gamblers will be gamblers. I bet that he will come back and do the same again. |
|
|
|
That guy really wants to lose it, doesn't he?
I guess... 00:42:14 *** fuckit (169618) [#148584193] bet 2170.97057849 BTC at 92% and won 165.18255156 BTC *** 00:43:32 *** fuckit (169618) [#148585325] bet 2336.15313005 BTC at 92% and won 177.75078975 BTC *** 00:48:31 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590355] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC *** 00:49:14 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590882] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC *** Well, let's look at it positively. If he continues like this he will lose it. Even 92% can go wrong. |
|
|
|
thanks a lot.
my network latency is much high ,when i play network game .
should i chang my network to adsl or other faster network supplier?
No problem. I don't know how much a fast network has to do with mining. Of course you would get work faster / send finished work faster. Hmmm. I don't know, sorry. |
|
|
|
-snip-
And now:
-snip-
biggest bets in last 52 weeks
+-----------+---------------+--------------+--------+--------+---------------------+
| betid | bet | profit | chance | uid | date |
+-----------+---------------+--------------+--------+--------+---------------------+
| 148576957 | 1767.51587669 | 134.4849098 | 92 | 169618 | 2013-10-02 07:35:40 |
| 148575921 | 1767.51587669 | 134.4849098 | 92 | 169618 | 2013-10-02 07:34:53 |
| 148575723 | 1767.51587669 | 134.4849098 | 92 | 169618 | 2013-10-02 07:34:43 |
| 14740956 | 640 | -640 | 90 | 12 | 2013-07-07 18:03:05 |
That guy really wants to lose it, doesn't he? |
|
|
|
Josh's pictures delivery time: 2 more weeks. 
|
|
|
|
In a recent PM to me (maybe a week ago), mechs told me:
(06:49:06 PM) mechs: if I thought you were running a scam, I would be nice, divest, and then bad mouth you
I don't get the impression that's what he's doing, but it's an interesting possibility.
I'm so sick of this shit... -snip- I'm meant to believe that once, and only once, the withdraw form ignored the value typed into it and decided to use a different address? Sounds like pure bullshit from mechs. |
|
|
|
Doog: I mentioned this earlier, maybe it was too stupid to deserve a response but could your software and historical rolls be audited by a trusted third party (such as the one used by pokerstars which gave me this: PokerStars shuffle verified by Cigital, PokerStars submitted extensive information about the PokerStars random number generator (RNG) to Cigital. We asked this trusted resource to perform an in-depth analysis of the randomness of the output of the RNG, and its implementation in the shuffling of the cards on PokerStars) or does that lead to potential exploitation as well?
It's not stupid, no. The site uses the standard OpenSSL RAND_bytes call for its randomness. http://www.openssl.org/docs/crypto/RAND_bytes.htmlI'm not sure what Pokerstars' claim is worth. Their game isn't provably fair. There's nothing to stop them submitting a fair RNG for auditing and then using a different, corrupt RNG to deal their games. Like when a company keeps two sets of books - one to show the auditor and one that tells the truth. I'm not suggesting Pokerstars is corrupt (though it's an accusation I see a lot), but the fact that they have a good RNG doesn't prove that they don't also have a bad one that they use exclusively. OK, sure I get that it proves nothing going forward but what about going backwards? If they audit and see that there was true randomness in all events up until this point couldn't that prove a similar point? Maybe the only solution is to have everything back-checked at checkpoints every X period. That sounds like a good idea. |
|
|
|
|
2FA would be nice if you login.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, it's your own fault if you ask me. We have been warning people for years not to sell through PayPal.
|
|
|
|
|
God. You should know this as a miner.
Efficiency is how many blocks you requested and solved. If you request one before you solved the last one your efficiency will drop. (Correct me if I am wrong people).
Also, your speed wiggles around all the time. My USB Block Erupter sometimes hit 400 MH/s, but can also go to just 201 MH/s. It will never give preciously 330 MH/s.
|
|
|
|
|
Website seems to be down.
Nvm. Up again.
|
|
|
|
So is that mech's fault? I'm confused who is at fault.
I would say so. He entered a wrong address and got fucked up. Bad luck for him. |
|
|
|
Just received my block erupter, sadly the value was marked as 50$ and thus I had to pay 22.98 euros of fee's, basically the same amount as the block erupter :p. Maybe I can still change it/get rid of it because they marked it wrongly, they marked it as a coin. But still, I hope I can resolve this.
Damnit. That wasn't at all what I put on the paperwork. I used $10. Sorry about that. Send me your wallet addresses. I'll shoot you guys some change. This wasn't intentional - and I don't know what happened. It sucks for everyone. I have to, sadly, disagree with you. You really wrote down 50, I guess in a hurry:  It's nice of you that you will send us some change and mistakes can happen, right? You can send it to, uhm, my donation address I guess: " 1TDJ6DskKUwHbujfEo1CjJXeHd2y14cXj" |
|
|
|
Success! Your item has been received. It will be reviewed by one of our team members  |
|
|
|
|
Damn, that guy really doesn't understand the word "trust".
|
|
|
|
Sampey,
Does that mean that the 10 people who already paid for CAT will have to pay again for the second beta? Thus far, I have not made any significant amount of BTC and I think this is because of the Limiter that is set at <1 BTC, because if we were making larger trades, than I think that the program would be able to more easily earn greater profits.
-Adeel
Based on all the posts in this topic I would say the 10 people who bought it will be updated. But I'm not Sampey, so I don't know for sure.  |
|
|
|
|
The profile page text doesn't show correctly. I added a link, but it doesn't get shown. Also, their is a HUGE gap between my Store Picture and the Store text.
EDIT: It seems that I cannot send my file for a review. I do not get any error message. It just redirects me to the same page over and over.
|
|
|
|
Gonna submit my Faucet Script. Might even win a price if I do |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
