I thought that if Coinbase ever fails or it blocks random accounts, then I need to use an address signed from my personal electrum wallet. New Address: 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX
This is jackg from bitcointalk.org changing a staked address from 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY to 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX on 23:41BST 22/08/2016.
INmHoCEN5a8SETcdm7szP9kUYhaE7jeOYbcHt53sdhzRPFUqHjIuLTlo8wIXPTCJeZHjgasqQvo/GB+ZSx1WtO4=
Old Address 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY
This is jackg from bitcointalk.org changing a staked address from 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY to 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX on 23:41BST 22/08/2016.
H6ID68SXZpt9KOHXFbJOH2o5OEi21lg6skpXcOjJXO93fA96KwJWhCkgbdzozjzActfjwk/1tS0F8A4mhsQGu+w=
(NOTE: after the signature there's an accidental extra space so please be sure to include that when verifying this). Any questions please ask them. |
|
|
|
I need it to be seen and verified by a trusted user before I can do that.
Not really. If you lock the thread it would prevent me, or anyone else, from editing their post. Regardless, I'll bite (If I am trusted enough that is). New address verified - Old address verified. And I could not post it in that thread as I am changing it from one I posted in that thread. People on this forum may need a greater explanation as to why I'm changing it so It's own topic is a better option.
It is completely possible to post an explanation in the thread, and it is also completely possible to post that you're staking another address in that thread. I'll lock this and post in the other thread then as this has enough information that is needed. I assume that you own both of those accounts? And you can tell why I don't really trust quotes from "newbie" users just in case they're eited or reported or something (though you are correct that locking this would block that). |
|
|
|
New Address: 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX
This is jackg from bitcointalk.org changing a staked address from 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY to 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX on 23:41BST 22/08/2016.
INmHoCEN5a8SETcdm7szP9kUYhaE7jeOYbcHt53sdhzRPFUqHjIuLTlo8wIXPTCJeZHjgasqQvo/GB+ZSx1WtO4=
Old Address 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY
This is jackg from bitcointalk.org changing a staked address from 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY to 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX on 23:41BST 22/08/2016.
H6ID68SXZpt9KOHXFbJOH2o5OEi21lg6skpXcOjJXO93fA96KwJWhCkgbdzozjzActfjwk/1tS0F8A4mhsQGu+w=
(NOTE: after the signature tere's an accidental etra space so please be sure to include that when verifying this). You could have easily posted this in the Stake Your Bitcoin Address thread; there was no need for it to be it's own. Either way, I have quoted it. You can lock it and move it to Archival now, before the signature spammers get hold of it. I need it to be seen and verified by a trusted user before I can do that. And I could not post it in that thread as I am changing it from one I posted in that thread. People on this forum may need a greater explanation as to why I'm changing it so It's own topic is a better option. |
|
|
|
~snip~
Exactly. No one is going to get the collateral eventually if you default as it can take around 30 days for theymos to reset the password and you could easily destroy it or start a scam in that time. Also, you may be able to find a lender who will keep posting for you (as in you PM them as to where to post and what text to put and they can post your post for you as you wrote it). But that option is unlikely. However, it would be useful in this event. And why i lender to do this? To earn what? And why to make all this trouble? Its true a way but i dont believe that anyone will do this... If it's the only way that then lender could do it then it is a way in order to do it, not a good way, but a way. Another way is the get the campaign manager to pay to the lender by signing a message from the address in the campaign. Which is another difficult way, but one that may work (but not as well as you don't have the collateral). |
|
|
|
I thought that if Coinbase ever fails or it blocks random accounts, then I need to use an address signed from my personal electrum wallet. New Address: 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX
This is jackg from bitcointalk.org changing a staked address from 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY to 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX on 23:41BST 22/08/2016.
INmHoCEN5a8SETcdm7szP9kUYhaE7jeOYbcHt53sdhzRPFUqHjIuLTlo8wIXPTCJeZHjgasqQvo/GB+ZSx1WtO4=
Old Address 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY
This is jackg from bitcointalk.org changing a staked address from 1GybvzB8d1cZAtySZCjMBr4RrwsYVQg8dY to 1JKAEFZh1esAYBtQK5F5Nc5tybfwcRCFvX on 23:41BST 22/08/2016.
H6ID68SXZpt9KOHXFbJOH2o5OEi21lg6skpXcOjJXO93fA96KwJWhCkgbdzozjzActfjwk/1tS0F8A4mhsQGu+w=
(NOTE: after the signature tere's an accidental etra space so please be sure to include that when verifying this). Any questions please ask them. Once I have this confirmed by a few users, I'll lock this thread. |
|
|
|
|
OK. Can we at least stop spamming to say that the site is dead?
I realised that I cannot access it through a site like archive.is, but I can access it directly from my browser? Does anyone know why this would be and if there is a reason that I can still access it even though others say it is down?
EDIT: maybe my browser archives sites that I've recently viewed and that is why I can see it still.
|
|
|
|
Name:btcdevil
Loan:0.03btc
repay:0.033btc
reason: personal
duration: 7 days
Collateral: Signed message from bitcointalk account wallet address.
Dude, that's not collateral at all. Signed message is simply a message that you can use to verify your ownership of that account. You can't sell a signed message in the market.  I mean i am giving this account as collateral but as i am under signature campaign so i have to make post so i wont be able to give the details but i can give signed message with stating of giving this account as collateral against the loan. It is not a collateral if you are not willing to give your log in details to escrow or the lender. Collateral is something the lender can sell incase you default so how can he sell your account if you failed to pay if you won't give it? Exactly. No one is going to get the collateral eventually if you default as it can take around 30 days for theymos to reset the password and you could easily destroy it or start a scam in that time. Also, you may be able to find a lender who will keep posting for you (as in you PM them as to where to post and what text to put and they can post your post for you as you wrote it). But that option is unlikely. However, it would be useful in this event. |
|
|
|
I think that's the point of it being decentralised. It is really hard for people to track it.
If hacking can take place in Bitcoin, so can tax evasion.
governments dont need to care about who paid you, or need to care about how much you were paid to start a civil recovery process on you (tax fine) there are many non-blockchain ways to red flag someone. for instance if they see someone applying for a mortgage, but have filed tax forms to say they have no income... red flag but if they see someone buying a house outright, but have filed tax forms to say they have no income... red flag seeing someone apply for car insurance on a modest priced car. red flag poor people cannot really afford to maintain a low priced car with no income. so if governments see you driving a car.. red flag even things like passports and plane tickets.. red flag their bank account statement shows funds moving in and out that technically should not exist to such a poor person then all they need to do is make a court order to get you to investigate yourself, where you have to provide proof of payment, etc as to how you were able to maintain a less than poor lifestyle while being poor. while they just sit back and work out how much to fine you to settle their minds. or how much time to put you in jail if they drum up a story that you got funds through criminal activity. whereby you are then really pressured to prove where funds came from including proving it was 'legit' this is why so many poor people get hit with tax fines.. because its easy to spot a poor person with money then it is for a rich person. these government tactic end up making poor people paranoid. EG even going so far as having no insurance so that they really really need to be watching what they do when they drive. concentrating harder to not get a speeding ticket, parking ticket, to avoid red flags about a vehicle. yes you can register a car to a "trust" or offshore entity. but u cant get car insurance on a trust. cant have any registered property or insure your house/property ending up as a nomad living in squats (ref: amir taaki as prime example) But these are just odd ways of tracing people. Sure it is done like this and people can detect different things that people are doing, however, it is always difficult to truly detect something like that. A person on a good job to simply say "yeah, I bought them that car" could really put a hole in the governments scheme for example. Though it is unlikely you'd get a person to do that it could still happen. |
|
|
|
That url is down FYI(at the time of this post). I can't tell you because of that.
No It wasn't, I got through. You ust have a terrible connection to that site as I needed to get a connection in order to get the right link. I only stumbled accross this a while back but BW do cloud mining. Is it profitable/trustworthy to use and has anyone got a profit. I know people tend to say that mining with the fixed returns idea is bad but they ofer it on that site so I just thought I'd check it here first for it's reputation. bw urlIn my experience since I use bitcoin, I guess there's no cloudmining site that is trustworthy enough, even the HO as what people says that is trusted enough but it scammed over 700,000 users of it. So how can people trust again to that kind of site. And btw that site says "This site can’t be reached" "bw.com’s server DNS address could not be found." it is down right now.  There are only 2 legit cloud miners, that I know off; BW is one of them, Hashnest is the other one. As for the rest, there are many degrees on 'legitimacy'; a nice thread regarding can be found here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=878387.0Is it profitable? Frankly, that's a difficult factor. Since the ASICs, everything is only that much profitable until the next version comes out or the difficulty has risen thus far in the meantime. As for now, BW is only 1 out of 2 worldwide companies that uses the latest < 20nm chips (BW uses 14nm, Hashnest uses custom 16nm). So as for technology goes, yes, currently they are profitable. But for how long, that is an answer nobody knows (like next innovation, difficulty rise, BTC price). Is BW trustworthy? Well, that depends on what you would define "trustworthy". If it means that they pay their customers and such, the answer is yes. If it means something in the spirit of the Bitcoin idea (decentralized), my personal view would be no: Unlike Hashnest, BW doesn't distribute its technology. But anyway, BW is legit. They are not a ponzi like hashocean or something, or a 'limited' legit company like CEX.io (3rd party hardware). If you want to invest with them, then yes, that is safe to do. If it would bring you profit, that is something else  I believe that miningsweden.se was quite a good one (though, they're always sold out recently). Hashocean was already odd. It was looked it wasn't going to last. The were paying me 0.005 BTC/two weeks when mining with them. That didn't seem reasonable. Though, in someways they didn't and still don't seem like a scam. I only stumbled accross this a while back but BW do cloud mining.
Is it profitable/trustworthy to use and has anyone got a profit. I know people tend to say that mining with the fixed returns idea is bad but they ofer it on that site so I just thought I'd check it here first for it's reputation.
[u r l=http://bw.com]bw url[/url]
new cloudmining sites are always created with new names, and start scamming people over and over. and as long as people are desperate for making a profit they will continue doing this. so unless you could see the mining equipment with your own eyes it is a Ponzi and you should stay away. and even if you saw the equipment it still doesn't mean cloudmining is profitable. Do you know nothing about them? I'll help, go to blockchain.info/pools and see that BW makes up qute a large amount of the network with Bitfury and antpool. |
|
|
|
I only stumbled accross this a while back but BW do cloud mining. Is it profitable/trustworthy to use and has anyone got a profit. I know people tend to say that mining with the fixed returns idea is bad but they ofer it on that site so I just thought I'd check it here first for it's reputation. bw url |
|
|
|
~snip
Doesn't that transaction get pushed up as the fee is greater as some more amount of data would have to be stored to transfer 1000 BTC compared to 0.1 BTC (It'd only be a few bytes bigger but it would have a greater fee). This probably is also used to stop people clogging the network with small transactions when they can send one large one instead. Also, based on the previous subject, if the network releases the blocks in a lower amount of time then the community would have to edit everything (Including, site scripts and APIs). no the data size for 1000 btc can be as low as 227kb the data size for .1 btc can be as low as 227kb. If I had 1000 btc from solo mining when blocks were 50 btc it would be 20 blocks into my account. Forget fees just made it 50btc per block for easy math. This would be 20 x 227kb = 4540kb on move from address A to Address B since it was 20 transactions to get the 1000 btc. When I move from Address B to Address C it wold be 227kb physical size. I could do a fee of .0001 in the case of the 0.1 btc Lets say I was mining on a pool and I ran 0.01 per block so 100 transactions at 227kb = 22700kb moving from address D to address E when I move from address E to Address F THE SIZE IS 1 TRANSACTION OF 227KB. SO if I pay 0.0001 for this move of 0.1 btc size of 227kb VS 0.0001 for the first move of 1,000 btc size of 227kb the network will put the 1000 btc ahead of the 0.1 btc in priority. as for the smallest transaction in kb it is 227kb. I have moved 36btc in a 227kb transaction on a group buy of Avalon 6's Is the transaction size often 227kb or is that just the minimum it can be? This therefore means that the network just favours the process larger amounts of BTC than smaller amounts fo BTC. PRobably to increase the volume of BTC sent accross the network per day possibly. Or it could just be a way to easilly organise the transactions when the fee is the sime. Also, does the messages you add to transactions also increase the transaction size so a greater fee is needed to convey a message about a transaction? |
|
|
|
I will like to know secured online wallets that require 2fa before sending btc.
The Ledger Nano S has the FIDO for stronger authentication as can be seen in the pic below  It has also the PIN to protect logging in from any malware or any other software but with the Nano S you should use buttons. This means that even if your computer is infected you still are safe using this wallet (which is for bitcoin and ethereum too) How is data stored though? It's good until somethig bad happens! If it uses flash technology then it's likely to fail in an unreasonably small amount of time (If using every day, you're lucky to get a year out of it). |
|
|
|
Like you said transaction fees, that means who ever wish to send bitcoin will need to pay transaction fee, no matter is it for gambling or trading, or buying pizza. From beginning I was thinking about this connection between governments and blockchain/bitcoin. I always thought how interesting will be when they decide to get into blockchain/bitcoins, and how they are just investigate what is this all about. Now I think they don't know what to do with btc, cause in beginning they thought bitcoin don't have future, and all of a sudden btc worth a lot, and more and more people are joining. They didn't expect this, and now entering and taxing bitcoin will be hard for them. There is TOR`s, VPN`s and other services, anyone can skip government tax system.
Yep. That's highly possible that you can easily skip taxes and it's very hard to trace. If you use TOR then your IP is almost completely hidden and is very hard to trace (unless there are instrumental methods avaliable to test it). Things are also encrypted by VPNs and Tor and are much harder to get to the root sender. Also, i they come into it too late then it's there fault. We cannot work on a voluntary status as the largest company is always going to be the one that can avoid tax. When the largest comapanies, in fiat, cannot be tracked in their ta avasion (such as google) then there's no hope for the government tracking Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Dear Lightlord/Luptin, what do I have to do in other for to join your avatar campaign since your campaign was listed on here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1087042.0 among the campaign that allow to be combined with some other signature campaign. You are mistaken about that. That is a list of avatar campaigns. The fact that this service allows avatars means it was placed there. You do however have to have both the signature and avatar to join here, there is no avatar-only scheme in place for you. Was i accepted?
You're accepted when your name is on the spreadsheet, if it isn't there then assume you haven't been accepted. If I were you though, I'd wait until Monday and change it instead of now as you may get accepted when Lutpin processes the payments. |
|
|
|
|
I predict that the Bitcoin price will probably be around $2020!
It's a good amount for Bitcoin to go or and a doubling of the price is expected towards the halving.
There will also be more trust built up against the coin in this time making it used by more and it may be accepted by sites like Google and Apple if it get more government approval.
|
|
|
|
Blockchain.info requires SMS verification before logging in, that is some sort of 2FA.
They need to extend it to the sending of Bitcoins too, but if the 2FA was bypassed or compromised at login, no form of 2FA will help, when transactions are being send. You might link that to another mobile phone to strengthen the 2FA, if you want double protection. In some countries SiM swap & duplication is quite common, so this is not 100% bulletproof. On that idea, if you can bypass the first 2FA screen, can you not bypass the second one as easily? Coinbase.com uses 2FA on signup and, if you don't mind waiting 48 hours, you can store your coins in a vault and you can add as many emails and phones as you want to help keep the Bitcoins safe. You get authentication messages on each phone or email you add but you do have to wait the 48 hour cancellation period for protection. (I think there may be an option for you to customise your wallet in order to change this by producing another wallet and a google search would probably help you find information about this). I will like to know secured online wallets that require 2fa before sending btc.
Coinbase offers this kind of feature, you can specify in which situations you require 2FA. For example: Require verification code to send:
Any amount of bitcoin or ethereum — Most secure
Over 1.2000 BTC (64.3087 ETH) per day
Never — Least secure Thanks but coinbase bans your account if used for gambling. Do you know any other wallet with this feature Send the coins through a bitcoin mixer in order to protect them. Alternatively, you could use an electrum wallet or another lite wallet to transfer funds and then it's like your receiving coins from a friend or something who likes to gamble. (If you do it every week, then it may look like you're advertising the site instead - which you are not banned for). |
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers need to deploy lightning network. If things go according to plan and bitcoin goes mainstream, the congestion will multiply and people might start looking at some altcoin to replace bitcoin.
That'll never happen. What about the block rewards? How frequent is a new block released. Maybe a network with a new block every 60 seconds and an income to miners of 1.25 BTC may be quite good. However, then there's more problems (such as: how is the hard fork done on the network, It's decentralised and cannot really be controlled by one device, every bitcoin core has to be edited in order or this to happen and that's easier said than done). Faster blocks also increase the risk of forking the network. The only thing that needs to be changed somehow imo is to allow more transactions to go through at lower fees. The fees have grown quite fast the last year and the blocks are almost all full nowadays. Hardforking the network is not very likely after ethereum/ethereum classic drama. It will only get people to want to have both coins and both coins tradable and there will always be some exchanges that will offer the original chain coins. Exactly. It's not a good idea to do a hard fork as it also reduces stability. Based on the maintenance fee idea. I understand that the transaction with the greatest BTC/KB gets priority in the block. The only way to do this is by getting the majority of the community to reduce the fee so then it is much cheaper to send bitcoins. If I'm not mistaken, there are a few more parameters than just the fee/kB that is included to determine whether a transaction gets included in a block or not. Coin age is one of those. I think it is possible to send the coins mined and not moved in the early days without a fee and still get high priority when sending them. A big move of btc say 1000 btc gets pushed up the list vs a move of .1 btc. this would be in the case of size in kb and fee being equal the 1000btc move gets the nod. Doesn't that transaction get pushed up as the fee is greater as some more amount of data would have to be stored to transfer 1000 BTC compared to 0.1 BTC (It'd only be a few bytes bigger but it would have a greater fee). This probably is also used to stop people clogging the network with small transactions when they can send one large one instead. Also, based on the previous subject, if the network releases the blocks in a lower amount of time then the community would have to edit everything (Including, site scripts and APIs). |
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers need to deploy lightning network. If things go according to plan and bitcoin goes mainstream, the congestion will multiply and people might start looking at some altcoin to replace bitcoin.
That'll never happen. What about the block rewards? How frequent is a new block released. Maybe a network with a new block every 60 seconds and an income to miners of 1.25 BTC may be quite good. However, then there's more problems (such as: how is the hard fork done on the network, It's decentralised and cannot really be controlled by one device, every bitcoin core has to be edited in order or this to happen and that's easier said than done). Faster blocks also increase the risk of forking the network. The only thing that needs to be changed somehow imo is to allow more transactions to go through at lower fees. The fees have grown quite fast the last year and the blocks are almost all full nowadays. Hardforking the network is not very likely after ethereum/ethereum classic drama. It will only get people to want to have both coins and both coins tradable and there will always be some exchanges that will offer the original chain coins. Exactly. It's not a good idea to do a hard fork as it also reduces stability. Based on the maintenance fee idea. I understand that the transaction with the greatest BTC/KB gets priority in the block. The only way to do this is by getting the majority of the community to reduce the fee so then it is much cheaper to send bitcoins. |
|
|
|
I think you have a great point, sooner or later the government is going to charge us with bitcoin tax, that is the reason there are a lot of the user dont want the government to interfere with bitcoin, but sooner or later the rules is going to happen, let just see when and how is the regulation
I think that's the point of it being decentralised. It is really hard for people to track it. If hacking can take place in Bitcoin, so can tax evasion. I am not sure but doesn't the fact that Bitcoin runs on a decentralised system bypass taxes. The community is in charge of Bitcoin right. My second point everyone wouldn't have to pay taxes because they don't gamble or trade. Taxes only apply for gamblers or traders as you said. governments cannot automaticly remove bitcoin out of someones bitcoin private key. but they can take fiat out of bank accounts with a court order. with a few laws, governments can 'threaten' its residents that if they hold bitcoin they need to pay a percentage of bitcoin value to the government or face legal action. at the moment in most developed countries, bitcoin is classed as an asset. and so any income or gains you make from your assets need to be declared and taxed. at the moment bitcoin is treated as a civil thing (finance), meaning there are some loopholes, but if they raised it to criminal, then things can get nasty its not about the currency.. taxes are predominently about where you reside and the laws of the land you reside on. no matter what the currency is. And this washed away any hope of actually being your own bank. You will always owe your master. The State will not go quietly into the night and any thoughts of liberating yourself from the clutches of corruption is built on false assumptions. When they are ready to send out enforcers they will. By that point though the body will have already signed the contract. "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." People keep forgetting what the term "web" means. I think you keep forgetting the term of sanity? This seems a bit rant like and is quite odd (not usually the thing done with people who have Bitcoin). |
|
|
|
|
I'm conused as to what this is about but do know that I am currently not in any debt to my local government.
I do not need to pay tax as I do not have to pay tax when changing from Bitcoin to Fiat (my government say that Bitcoin is a currency in itself and is taxable in the same way as Fiat).
I also do not need to pay income tax as my signature does not earn me more than ~$150 a week or ~$1300 a month.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
