|
Thanks for the extra info Smalleyster.
The address you gave, 17SUD6KndgsQ6jckkxR3AvJTcyTRAKWH4m, has never been used. How did you get that address. Please remember that a wallet contains many addresses at once.
A search might not find wallet.dat if your antivirus put it in quarantine. Open AVG and look for a "quarantined files" option. Although, I really don't see why it would quarantine your wallet.dat, it is just plaintext.
Also, are you sure you checked "%APPDATA%\Roaming\bitcoin\wallet.dat"? Searches might not get that either. Go to start, press run (or vista+, just put it in the text box), and type copy/paste the exact sting inside the quotes (but without the quotes) and tell us what is in that folder.
|
|
|
|
What i think would be useful is if someone with the right set of skills and resources would monitor Deepbit and Slush, and figure out how much of their power comes from botnet participation...  BtcGuild was big until they supposedly decided to ditch a botnet and got DDOS'd. It will be interesting what size it will be once it comes back. Perhaps, on basis of that, we'll be able to make some wild guesses regarding how much of Deepbit is actually botnet power being stolen from unsuspecting internet users... Botnets simply cannot contribute that much. The average computer could only hash pathetically. Even tens of thousands of average computers would probably only be 50-100 gh/s. |
|
|
|
|
@bitoption
Glad to see this is still moving forward, I was starting to think this was a lost cause. Please prove me wrong soon.
In the meantime, I cannot withdraw my bitcoins, which as I'm sure you can imagine is very worrisome to me.
What should I do?
|
|
|
|
It's ironic that the users who are supposed to guarantee for the security of the network are the ones who care the least about it as long as it makes them a couple of legacy bucks.
who is designated responsibility for the security of the network? is that not up to the users to secure themselves? via securing their wallets and taking personal responsibility for third parties that they trust (pools, exchanges, etc)? It's the miner's job to verify the block chain. This is the main nerve of Bitcoin, and it's not affected by locally encrypted files or auditing of services. If the operator started monkeying with the transactions in the blocks it created...or tried to withhold some blocks in order to effect a double spend, I think it would get noticed in short order and the pool operator would find themselves swimming alone very quickly. If the motive of a pool operator is to discredit Bitcoin rather than profit, this attack would do much more damage than a few exchange rate swings. We've seen how BTC Guild usage recently exploded, so it's not unthinkable that future pools will be able to gain mass network share. If profit is the motive I guess it would be a lot easier to just keep a few blocks now and then without announcing it to the users. And I suspect this is already happening. Why risk taking a whole block every now and then when you get 3% of each block anyway? And it isn't risk free, the miner could have software that informs him he has found a block, and if it isn't later reported, it could arouse suspicion. |
|
|
|
|
Man, we've been hit my someone else who is like "my bitcoins disappeared", but doesn't provide ANY USEFUL INFORMATION. I'm calling FUD. We need addresses, we need websites visited and programs run, we need AV logs and the .exe to diagnose. Why can't anyone compromised give us those things?
I swear, I'm starting to believe in a conspiracy to keep "I've been hacked threads" on the forum.
|
|
|
|
|
You know, as long as they are up on that chart, that is proof that they are using their resources productively. I'd be more suspicious is deepbit suddenly dropped to a small sliver, that could mean that they are diverting hashing power to an attack.
But then again, we don't know how big deepbit is besides what they productively do. Perhaps they are three times that large and are using the rest to mount a long term attack. And in the meantime, they are paying off their miners with their own funds. /conspiracy theory
My point is, the chart is useless. If someone were attacking, they wouldn't be on the chart. If they are on the chart, they aren't attacking.
|
|
|
|
It's not about the probability of it happening, It's about the possibility.
As it wasn't possible before, but now it is(almost).
You're right the pool owner probably won't try to sabotage it, but it's possible for him to do it.
It is possible to do a double spend attack when you have 49%, or 48%, or even 40%. You just have to get lucky and create more blocks than the rest of the network over a short period of time. Even with 50% or 51%, you still need a good bit of luck. |
|
|
|
|
Where did the original post go?
EDIT: Ah, it is back.
|
|
|
|
P.S. I just waited two damn minutes for the reply window to open !  This forum is damn sluggish today ! And time is money ! It's just you. It's not just me, my Internet connection is much faster then needed for his forum, my processor is fast enough, most other sites out there work perfectly fine, and this one usually works faster. But today sometimes it responds almost instantly and sometimes I wait for half a minute. Yeah, I sometimes have a little bit of lag on the forum too. It was non-responsive a little while ago for a bit. It happens. |
|
|
|
What the hell is that? How did it get up there? |
|
|
|
|
For the thousandth time, having 50% doesn't really help your attack chances all that much compared to having 49%. And even if you do have that much, the worst an attacker can do is double spend their own coins. No one can take your bitcoins or anything (at least, not the ones with many confirmations).
The best attack a pool with >50% could do is begin going backward in the block chain to rewrite it. During that time, no one in the pool would be getting paid, so people would be like, WTF. The network hash rate would drop by half so more people would be like WTF. Sooner or later the plot would be revealed and people would switch pools. No big deal. End of story.
On top of that, the pool owner probably has a heavy investment in bitcoins. If he screws with bitcoins he is just hurting his investment. Who would do that? He could probably make many, many times more continuing to run his pool correctly then he could get from a few hours of double spends followed by a crash.
The only real effect a >50% attack can have is mucking up bitcoin. And it only lasts as long as the 50% remains in control of an attacker. A pool isn't going to have that for long.
|
|
|
|
Get your fucking shit straight or in 5 days... Soon... Yes, get the torpedoes ready! |
|
|
|
The only reason people are getting involved is because they know that there is a limit. Who in their right mind would invest in something that will be diluted infinitely? The price of bitcoins would still be at $0.001 if there was an infinite supply. An infinite supply mean that no matter the demand, the price is going to be tiny, because there will always be more.
The first is just your opinion (Which is fine), the later is misleading and untrue, because demand could rise with supply, bear human population growing rate in mind. Yes, you are right. It all depends on the growth rate vs adoption rate I suppose. I guess there could be no limit but it grows really slowly. If it grew linearly, we would almost be in the same position as now, as growth is expected to be exponential in the long term (even if also small). But still, I don't think people would look at small growth, or linear growth the same way they look at a fixed amount. Psychologically speaking, I know I am getting a permanent piece of the pie when I buy/mine bitcoins, and that is why I do it. |
|
|
|
|
What Bitcoin related programs have you downloaded and run lately?
Your wallet file went missing? Do you know your addresses so we can see if they have been transfered?
Perhaps bitcoin theft is starting to get integrated into real trojans. Interesting. If that's the case, wallet encryption is needed STAT. Any simplistic trojan can steal a wallet now, it would take a much more complicated one, and more time, if it were encrypted by default.
Glad you didn't lose much.
|
|
|
|
|
You could make about 5x more per computer by delivering ads than bitcoin mining. Of course, I suppose you can do both.
|
|
|
|
Here is my (very rough) attempt at smoothing the colors to suit me in photoshop. Which I only do because it is awesome, good job. You'll have to forgive me, I'm a color snob (photographer by trade).  |
|
|
|
I dislike the colors, but the model is obviously fine. It feels like maybe it should be thicker, but maybe not. It has something a a sleekness to it that thin.
Fair enough, which is why I am releasing the model so it can be tweaked and such. I am a bit surprised that gold isn't popular  Maybe it is just the brown background that clashed and the gold is fine. Or maybe the white embossing. But all in all, great work. I feel like I'd like a richer gold, less yellow. I'll open it up and tweak it later. Could you send me the .obj? |
|
|
|
This is not a manner of a elementry school, It does not matter if it is "fair" to mine bitcoins, And receive so very many dollars from it. What matters is this limit is idiotic. There is no need for it, And it will cause the eventual demise of bitcoins, For bitcoins will become as any other currency. I must buy bitcoins in order to receive them in place of mining them, And this will discourage many. If this occurs, Bitcoins will become somewhat a stock market, You can buy bitcoins when the value drops, And sell them when it increases, Yet you cannot add to this by mining bitcoins, Thus the use decreases, And the value.
The only reason people are getting involved is because they know that there is a limit. Who in their right mind would invest in something that will be diluted infinitely? The price of bitcoins would still be at $0.001 if there was an infinite supply. An infinite supply mean that no matter the demand, the price is going to be tiny, because there will always be more. The current price is from people speculating on future demand given a finite supply. tl;dr -- No on would invest in bitcoin if there were an infinite amount of them. I know I wouldn't. |
|
|
|
|
Yes, that was truly incredible accuracy on your original forecast. I did not believe it when I first saw it. It seems to hard to predict. I think it would have been right on the nose if not for the mt gox incident.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
