|
username: LuckyCris
Not sure how often we get the bonus...
|
|
|
|
|
I sent for you. Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
Wait a minute... I can get paid? I'm in.
|
|
|
|
|
Not really sure. Hubby's working, maybe I might clean house. Maybe I get dressed and head over to my sister's. Maybe I might buy some more coins and hit the casinos. Maybe I might try and get some sleep. Maybe I should get the fuck off my computer.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually put me in the spirit. It's absolutely fabulous!
|
|
|
|
What happens if a coalition of governments publishes a modified client....
Wouldn't surprise me. And I guess some of us would become mining criminals. But if there were a 'split' technically you'll have two coins, right? So they can keep client they made. What happens if instead of the above, you have JP morgan, intel, samsung, etc build giant mining facilities that end up controling 90% of mining.
Don't think the government would have to do much bribing. But all they'd have to do is build the biggest, baddest miner to take over. - Addresses would become the new social security number.
- We'd be taxed of course.
- All transactions would be monitored; anything suspect and it'll never get confirmed.
- Our balance would be allowed to go in the red.
- Bitcoin loan companies would sprout out like liquor stores.
- Uncle Sam will always get its cut first. Hope you don't owe taxes or gov't debt.
- They'd create a world wide lottery via the blockchain. No need to go out and buy tickets anymore.
- It's the gov't so expect slow confirmation times.
- Blockchain shutdown during holidays perhaps.
- It's the gov't so expect lots of errors.
Man, that list could go on and on! |
|
|
|
Merry BRISKET - Now having been in the oven for a total of 6 hours. A 6.4 pound BRISKET, YUM!
So ... what are YOU having for Christmas Dinner? I got Cajun stuff too ...
I'm hungry now. Edit: Guess while I'm here I could post my address  1JT4ihq5brRAhHTTz4XUV7gbFBtV78Ef8g |
|
|
|
Then 2x 850 or so sounds about right based on my limited research. Possibly you could get by with a 750 + a 850 for one machine?
Hell if I know. But I'll find out. Sending PM. |
|
|
|
This thread was crap from the get go, it's no big loss. No, my man, you still don't get it. A random throw of the "dice" is not like a car going bad from wear. Thinking any different is nothing more than gamblers fallacy. It feels different, but it's not. I don't really care to read about your proof, but I'm sure I would have heard of it were it legitimate and from one of the big dice sites. There are a lot of straight up rip-off casinos though, and it seems you may have found one of those. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamblers_fallacyHey!!! I actually like reading this thread! It's crap but you entertain it. But to rebut... 1) Why do I have to be a man... although I can be a little aggressive/bossy I try to soften my tone with 'pleases' and 'thanks' and other nice shit like that 2) Trust me, I do get it! Point out one comment I said suggesting otherwise; you can't because I agree with you 3) I knew the car analogy was a bad example (even said so), but I couldn't resist... your name 4) I'm a realistic thinker; but I think you missed the fact I was referring to marketing tactics; similar to bait and switch 5) If you skim this forum, you've heard about them way before I posted proof, and thanks for acknowledging that I found one You really put a lot of effort into talking some sense into me, eh? If I had big brother, you'd be his voice. |
|
|
|
Also, if someone was interested in picking up some PSUs/Mobo/5850s from me, that would possibly nix the need for the loan.
PSUs still available? Yes, off the top of my head I have ~600w, ~750w, ~850w, and either a 900 or 1200, I can't recall the exact level of the last one. Can't use the 600w... but I need a total of 4 to power a 10 GPU mining rig for alt coins. 5 GPUs per mobo; I'm advised to get two 850w for 5. I don't know crap about this power stuff; not sure if I can combine the 600w with the 900/1200w or what. Guess I need to get some consultation. What are you asking? You can run multiple PSUs on one setup, for example, main PSU powering mobo, some cards, CPU, and a secondary PSU plugged into the additional GPUs, so yes, that is possible. What cards are you using? Depending on their wattage, you might not need that many PSUs per grouping of GPUs. VisionTek AMD Radeon HD 7950s 3GB. |
|
|
|
Also, if someone was interested in picking up some PSUs/Mobo/5850s from me, that would possibly nix the need for the loan.
PSUs still available? Yes, off the top of my head I have ~600w, ~750w, ~850w, and either a 900 or 1200, I can't recall the exact level of the last one. Can't use the 600w... but I need a total of 4 to power a 10 GPU mining rig for alt coins. 5 GPUs per mobo; I'm advised to get two 850w for 5. I don't know crap about this power stuff; not sure if I can combine the 600w with the 900/1200w or what. Guess I need to get some consultation. What are you asking? |
|
|
|
Also, if someone was interested in picking up some PSUs/Mobo/5850s from me, that would possibly nix the need for the loan.
PSUs still available? |
|
|
|
im kind of wondering if the thread was actually made t o stop people from mining altcoins - so they could actually mine more of them at lower difficulty.
There is nothing wrong with taking some risks with altcoins. Bitcoin was a huge gamble and risk early on as well.
This is correct for newbies. For experienced users no. Investing in the right altcoin will prove to be much better than investing in bitcoin (in the future).
Interesting... |
|
|
|
If the two pools collude for a 51% attack, what would they gain? A double spend? What would the double spend get them?
There's more to gain than just double spending. Double spending is something the pool can do if it chooses. If they created a fork in the blockchain, they could double spend some coins and get away with it, which is what I think another post was referring to, coins getting lost forever. But say for example we're the powerhouse pool and we wanted to be bad... {Girl power!} Crap, am I by myself here? Damn it. Anyhoo, we created our version of the blockchain and it has all real transactions up until yesterday's. Today's transactions are bogus btw... we sent some coins there, and over there. Since we're the authoritative bitch (majority of computing power) theoretically we could force other pools to point to our 'fake' blockchain and accept our made up transactions from today. But I suspect we'd eventually get caught doing it this way. We should probably just pluck random, semi-large transactions. I think we're getting too caught up with the term attack. We want to think of a 51% attack as being intentionally malicious... Agreed, a pool out for gain intentionally exploiting their power/network can do some damage. But what about the unintentional consequence of having over 51% of the hashing power? Are we just going to dismiss this and focus on the bad stuff they can accomplish? A 51% Attack doesn't have to be intentional, does it? If any pool had 60% of the hashing power, an attack would be forthcoming. The pool doesn't have to try to do it, it will, which is why the pools cap themselves. Blocks other miners solve would be orphaned left and right... The longest chain always win the conflict, right? That isn't to say it was done intentionally or with malice. But whoever has the upper hand would benefit from the block rewards and transactions fees of those resolved 'conflicts.' On the other hand, if a pool wanted to orchestrate an attack... well, I guess that's another topic.
Can you explain how it works, or how the pool can prevent from abusing that power? Can that power be abused - oh, hell yes! I'm not talking about the many things that a pool powerhouse has the ability to do.... But how can said pool prevent from NOT taking other miners' block rewards and transaction fees? This isn't intentional - As the authority on the network (so to speak), clients will believe the pool's hashed transaction block over any other. That means the pool will win all transaction conflicts, and get the rewards.
Anybody? Or am I over-analyzing. For the purpose of your response, let's say it's an "honest pool." |
|
|
|
dont believe the hype the possibility of a 51% attack has been analysed ad hominum already and it will not result in everyones previously saved coins being suddenly worth "nothing" as someone just claimed  if there was any chance all the previously mined btc would become worthless due to a 51% attack i think they would have factored it in already Smiley Concur. |
|
|
|
51% attack do not allow you to steel money from someone else. Wrong. It can. It can rewrite the whole blockchain. Can I do this one!!! Give me a shot! -- Epic Confusion. No, IT (not really sure what you're referring to here) can't rewrite the whole blockchain, but someone can create a fake or alternate blockchain with all the previous transactions up to the point... wait, why am I even explaining this? You're confused; and I thought it was me. Consult with Google on Blockchain forks. |
|
|
|
No, because they are provably fair. If you think they are rigging bets there are things you can do to make it impossible for them to do so in the dark. Of course they can always steal from you once, but at least you'd have proof of it. Of all the accusations I've seen, I've only heard "20 in a row!!!" (statistically possible) and the like.
If you don't use those checks and balances to be sure you aren't being had, well that's on you. The table has always been against you loosing though, you've never had the chance, no matter how slight, of coming out ahead after many bets. Placing more bets just gives variance more of a chance to screw you, as it is supposed to.
Okay... so this was my epiphany; why are you trying to rain on my enlightenment? Here's my emoticon with X's for eyes and the tongue sticking out just for you: xx-P But on a serious note, what are the checks and balances? Changing the client seed that can be changed by a quick hiccup on the server side? I've done that just to check my proof and it wasn't what I entered. I understand losing and odds - I certainly don't expect to win 1/2 of the time even playing 50/50. But what I do expect is to be given the fair chance - the odds I pay for. Besides, the issue isn't the fact that I'm being had, the point is it's getting hard to find a casino where you won't be had. Perceived or real had. We wouldn't need those precautions if the 'had' don't exist, right? Because for every post like yours I see, the guy making it really doesn't see the issue. I've tried pointing it out before, but it never seems to work. I'm not trying to rain on any enlightenment, just make my point that you were never in a situation to come out ahead, the odds were always against you. I'm not sure if you see that now, but it would probably be a good thing to know. Hope you don't get mad that I thought I'd point that out for your benefit. You are making a claim that a popular site is ripping you off, yet you don't have any proof. If you have proof that a roll should have been a winning bet, but it came up loosing, you'd have a case. Either you don't know how to check them properly, or you actually have proof. If you were to continue using these sites I imagine such a skill would be most beneficial to learn. Confirm that you were ripped off and make it public (best be sure though, I don't like to look foolish any more than I have to myself.) All casinos are set up to take from you, please learn that now. Even the "fair" ones, they all have a house edge. You might win, but the thing is you don't complain then. When the odds go against you, all the sudden it's "fixed!" Can't you see that madness? It's unfortunate we've taken this thread on another level... But I'm not mad at all, you're actually looking out. I know the house eventually win; by design. I'm also not making a claim that a popular site is ripping me off, please re-read my original post. I said "seem to have taken a turn for the worst..." This implies my perception of the usual game play. You've driven your car long enough to know when there's something wrong, right? Well, maybe that's not the best analogy. But you hit it on the mark... in a 'fair' casino, I might win. Full circle, right back to my original point. Also, please don't generalize that people think that games are fixed because they're losing; this is ludicrous to anyone who gambles, it's a gamble after all. But it's of no wonder your message to others isn't being well-received, it could be your presentation. But I get what you're saying. Oh, and for the casino that I know for sure are ripping me off, yes I make it public. Read my previous posts. |
|
|
|
This isn't intentional - As the authority on the network (so to speak), clients will believe the pool's hashed transaction block over any other. That means the pool will win all transaction conflicts, and get the rewards. Epic confusion. A 51% attack is then the attacker blockchain voluntarily ignore every other blocks. An honest 51% holder would accept the blocks found by other people. [/quote] Well I'm sure as hell confused now if I weren't before. Are you talking about a blockchain fork, pseudo blockchains and such? No... wait, that can be done if the powerhouse pool wanted to do such a thing... but just to make sure I understand.... you're saying that if the pool with the majority of computing power is honest, it will accept other pools' blocks? Forgive my confusion... I just don't understand what this has to do with the price of rice in China. |
|
|
|
Look at you OP... got me challenging veteran members and I don't know what the hell I'm talking about |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
