Offer still avaible...send first for honest members...also i can do a donation for no risk...is not first time buying BTC with paypal ..i buying in past from Cryptology
There is ALWAYS risk with Paypal. what risk if he sent as for friend? 100% he can never charge back payment. lol really? is that what you think? I know becouse I'm buying credit, with one member of the other Forum, and sends the first as friend, me scamed and support paypal not me help to recovery money Did you admit you were buying BTC? If so the digital goods clause was invoked. However, if you funded via credit card, you can still file a charge back with them and Paypal won't lose money if at all possible. Please post your proof from Paypal. Wait so you are saying there is a way to trade btc to paypal without the risk of chargeback. now i'm confused? which one is it? your story changes constantly! |
|
|
|
It baffles me how you still think you didn't do anything wrong. By your own logic of wanting trust to appear trusted clearly there is a contradiction there, but it's become quite clear you are not a rational person nor can you think outside the box, not to mention you are being very immature about all this. So you're now going after vod because you've concocted a conspiracy that he's somehow involved in some other scam in an attempt to vindicate yourself? Well done, you've just joined the ever growing list of butthurt children who have received justified feedback from vod and want to try get their comeuppance. It's not going to work, so I'd just drop the whole thing because you're only going to come out looking worse than you already do, but if that's the path you're wanting to take so be it I guess.
Why don't you wait until Vod shows up before you decide that i've "concocted a conspiracy". |
|
|
|
Offer still avaible...send first for honest members...also i can do a donation for no risk...is not first time buying BTC with paypal ..i buying in past from Cryptology
There is ALWAYS risk with Paypal. what risk if he sent as for friend? 100% he can never charge back payment. lol really? is that what you think? I know becouse I'm buying credit, with one member of the other Forum, and sends the first as friend, me scamed and support paypal not me help to recovery money What? |
|
|
|
Interesting attack indeed but h4xx0r who did you quote with the idea of giving to the next miner a share of your coinbase tx? It's trivial to give to the next miner outside the coinbase transaction by sending the reward as a transaction using one of the current inputs. Sure, then you have to scrape the bitcoins from elsewhere. To recap the attack in laymen's terms: If somebody paid 10,000BTC in transaction fees, miners would not care about block rewards for the next 10,000/25=400 blocks. Any miner that thinks it could outrun the biggest other miner would try to do so. If there is a draw between the top miners, such a battle could take a long time. If the top miners hold 10% of the mining power, they might try even when the other had a head start and was slowly building a chain that's growing faster than the own chain as they could still call their friends of other pools to team up catch that guy, essentially to the point where all miners took one side or the other and the weaker group gives up. Also the attack does only work if the biggest selfish miner is bigger than the total of his run-up competitor with all non-selfish miners, so it assumes a pretty corrupt mining landscape. The attack's effects: During such an episode, massive re-orgs would happen, clients would act strangely, Finney attacks would be slightly easier etc. and we would have a slightly higher level of drama. And we will never know who sponsored that drama  but it would not be a cheap endeavor. In additional to Danny's point above, you also have the issue that someone would need to incur the financial burden to pay these TX fees in the first place. There would be little economic benefit for someone to offer such a large TX fee, especially considering that the benefactor of such attack is unclear (therefore anyone attempting to profit off of an attack may or may not actually benefit in the event such attack is successful in slowing down the network). IMO this attack vector would be something that is very easy to fix - simply fork the blockchain to institute a maximum TX fee on a per block and per TX basis, the max TX fee on a block basis could be a rolling average (plus some additional margin) of the last 'n' blocks and the max TX fee on a TX basis could be "x" times the min recommended TX fee, and if a TX would warrant larger then the max TX fee then the TX can be split up into smaller TXs. it would be a State actor or a someone who stands to lose alot to a technology like bitcoin who would carry out an attack like this. The purpose of the post isn't fear it's education. i think the goal is clear. a currency not controlled or easily defeated by malicious actors. Bitcoin does not pose a serious threat to any major government that would have these kind of resources. Also for the amount of money that it would take to start an attack (to give a large TX fee to the miners) would be better spent on miners (either buying them outright or renting hashpower) to be used to attack the network via other means as a lot would need to take place at once in order for this attack to work Well, so what you're saying is. the attack is possible, but its like getting struck by lighting or the stars aligning? we all know those things have never happened, so therefore we should do nothing about this attack. Shall bitcoin endure stupidity, at the hands of incapable curators? If so, then whoa is bitcoin. |
|
|
|
You mean projecting angst like having a temper tantrum and throwing your toys out of the pram and calling people faggots?  That sounds pretty angsty to me, whereas pretty much everyone else was trying to calmly give you advice. The sooner you realise where you went wrong the sooner you can move on from this but it doesn't look like you're mature enough to see any of this. you can't convince me of a lie. keep dreaming. |
|
|
|
But you just apologised: ok, i'm sorry.
Why apologise if you feel you haven't done anything wrong? You did several things wrong whether you want to admit it or not, mainly trying to buy trust then acting like a child about the whole situation, but it doesn't look like you're going to be able to drop this stubbornness so nothing will change here. I apologized for calling him a name, that does not mean i will be walked over, so gtfo with your bullshit. i don't care. I feel strongly that i did not doing anything wrong in the situation. That hasn't changed. I conceded the point and apologized to cooldgamer and to devthedev, so basically i am acknowledging that you would not allow me to stipulate that positive trust must be received in a trade(you deem this is buying trust, matter of opinion i guess, but whatever. your iq of 150 is clearly superior to mine). I am not admitting that i did anything untrustworthy, because I DID NOT. I am not admitting to buying trust, because THAT WAS NOT THE POINT. Kinda just threw that in there at the last second. I am still mad, true but whatever. You faggots win, so congratulations, here's your prize. My middle finger bitch! sit on it and spin. wait you'd probably like that. Now back to cooldgamer and devthedev. i apologized to them.One removed feedback, one did not. cooldgamer did not. Now Vod has decided to leave me a trust as a way to pile on the fire and join in the trolling. Vod will remove this trust or his role in helping Blazr cover up his scams will be revealed, that's all there is to it. Should cooldgamer decide to leave the trust rating, so be it. Oh, and pussy ass fuck boy, there is a difference between being stubborn and standing your ground. I'm not gonna take any shit, so go try that logic on someone dumb enough to accept it. |
|
|
|
But in a social setting, the default trust matters. Think about it, when we see people with big ugly red trusts, we make a mental note not to trust that person. We've all been scammed so we limit the risks by assuming the worst
Looks like now people will be making that mental note seeing your big ugly red trust. On one hand buying trust is pathetic, on the other it's sad, that a person who came here to ask how to get positive trust ends up with a negative one. I feel no shame. people project their angst on other people |
|
|
|
i will remove mine from you as well if you will do me that one favor.
Why wouldn't you remove your negative trust now, as a show of good faith? How old are you? Because i'm not a pushover. Perhaps what I'd do is remove the negative trust you gave them and PM saying you're sorry and asking them to remove the negative feedback they've given you. ' Apologize? for doing nothing wrong? yeah, ok |
|
|
|
Simply, we don't know if we can trust you.
Know trusted member will go first, because why should they trust you, when they are the trusted one ?
Secondly, trust is upon user discretion. I can put negative trust for everybody on BTCtalk, without any consequences. (The only exception is spamming by creating alts)
There is no "trust abuse", anybody can put trust for anybody, and if you get a red number because somebody negged you, its because they are on your trust list (Stop DefaultTrust if you don't like that !)
But in a social setting, the default trust matters. Think about it, when we see people with big ugly red trusts, we make a mental note not to trust that person. We've all been scammed so we limit the risks by assuming the worst |
|
|
|
I just signed up for free.. Whats the difference of jr n snr account?? Y pay for account when its free?
The difference is between getting paid 0.001 per post and a big fat zero on the signature deals. Plus higher Member status accounts don't have the waiting time that Newbs and Jnrs do. Comical to see you posting in this thread. I never realized your involvement at the time. |
|
|
|
You oughtta remember one of your best friends Vod. You and him and Blazr should be called the 3 stooges of bitcointalk. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=125582What do you plan to do with these accounts, out of curiosity?
I can't go into much detail as my competitors will copy me, but: These accounts are sold to trustworthy people who use them for running businesses, alts, skipping newbie jail etc. If you wish we can inform a mod (Maged) of the sale and the account will be marked as an alt of mine. Speak of bitcointalk corruption... |
|
|
|
Interesting attack indeed but h4xx0r who did you quote with the idea of giving to the next miner a share of your coinbase tx? It's trivial to give to the next miner outside the coinbase transaction by sending the reward as a transaction using one of the current inputs. Sure, then you have to scrape the bitcoins from elsewhere. To recap the attack in laymen's terms: If somebody paid 10,000BTC in transaction fees, miners would not care about block rewards for the next 10,000/25=400 blocks. Any miner that thinks it could outrun the biggest other miner would try to do so. If there is a draw between the top miners, such a battle could take a long time. If the top miners hold 10% of the mining power, they might try even when the other had a head start and was slowly building a chain that's growing faster than the own chain as they could still call their friends of other pools to team up catch that guy, essentially to the point where all miners took one side or the other and the weaker group gives up. Also the attack does only work if the biggest selfish miner is bigger than the total of his run-up competitor with all non-selfish miners, so it assumes a pretty corrupt mining landscape. The attack's effects: During such an episode, massive re-orgs would happen, clients would act strangely, Finney attacks would be slightly easier etc. and we would have a slightly higher level of drama. And we will never know who sponsored that drama but it would not be a cheap endeavor. In additional to Danny's point above, you also have the issue that someone would need to incur the financial burden to pay these TX fees in the first place. There would be little economic benefit for someone to offer such a large TX fee, especially considering that the benefactor of such attack is unclear (therefore anyone attempting to profit off of an attack may or may not actually benefit in the event such attack is successful in slowing down the network). IMO this attack vector would be something that is very easy to fix - simply fork the blockchain to institute a maximum TX fee on a per block and per TX basis, the max TX fee on a block basis could be a rolling average (plus some additional margin) of the last 'n' blocks and the max TX fee on a TX basis could be "x" times the min recommended TX fee, and if a TX would warrant larger then the max TX fee then the TX can be split up into smaller TXs. it would be a State actor or a someone who stands to lose alot to a technology like bitcoin who would carry out an attack like this. The purpose of the post isn't fear it's education. i think the goal is clear. a currency not controlled or easily defeated by malicious actors. |
|
|
|
i will remove mine from you as well if you will do me that one favor.
Why wouldn't you remove your negative trust now, as a show of good faith? How old are you? "BTCTalkAccounts" ring a bell? how about your involvement with Blazr and his scams. remember that? |
|
|
|
|
I was wondering, what other people who sit in a chair all day and work at the computer do to cope with chair fatigue. i mean the aching back and rear end. for me i try to exercise a bit everyday when i wake up and again before bed, but i still end up hurting every day around 5 pm. What do you do to cope with "chair fatigue"?
|
|
|
|
i will remove mine from you as well if you will do me that one favor.
Why wouldn't you remove your negative trust now, as a show of good faith? How old are you? Because i'm not a pushover. |
|
|
|
i want to trade with reputable members only so i don't get scammed!
When I don't want to be scammed (i.e. always) I trade with any member, reputable or not, but use a trustless escrow (e.g. bitescrow.org). Trading with a reputable member means nothing, as reputation doesn't guarantee that I won't be scammed. how can i do escrow with paypal? You can't, it can be charged back for months. I was thinking of finding reputable hero members and asking them to do trades with me. i would send first, proving i am trustworthy. Really i just want it for bragging rights. My friends at work will be jealous of my green trust rating
You made it pretty clear you were trying to artificially inflate your trust, it backfired. gg cooldgamer, i submit to you an public apology, and humbly beg you to remove the negative trust. It is true i wanted to get some positive trust quickly, and i suppose that means i tried to buy it,and i did ignore the warnings from KWH about doing so. I would have admitted it but for fear of being crucified and labeled as a scammer. I do not feel like it was that big of a deal, but nonetheless: I apologize and i will not do it again. I am also apologetic for calling you mean names. i have no excuse for doing so. please forgive me and remove the negative trust. i will remove mine from you as well if you will do me that one favor. |
|
|
|
The Latest from the mailing list sheds some light on this attack, and a new attack. some of these guys have a wealth of knowledge. If you want to get smarter, join the mailing list. it is a great read and is a good oppurtunity to learn about advanced concepts and technical information related to bitcoin technologies. On 06/10/2014 08:43 p.m., Tom Harding wrote:
> On 10/5/2014 4:00 PM, Sergio Lerner wrote:
>> If everyone acts rationally in his own interest, then the best choice
>> for the remaining miners is to try to mine a competing block at the
>> same height n including the high-fee transaction, to collect the fee
>> for themselves.
>
> Sergio --
>
> Just some thoughts on your interesting problem.
>
>
> Since everybody but M10 is on equal footing, I would expect M10 to
> have some fixed advantage depending on assumptions, and the bigger the
> advantage, the shorter the "freeze time".
>
Yes, that's how simulation works. The problem is that the existence of
high-fee delays the decision to switch to M10. Since the network is
moving slower (because of fragmentation) the effect of the high-fee is
twofold: it delays the convergence because it promotes selfishness and
it delays convergence because it promotes fragmentation.
During that time window where the network is frozen, any other high-fee
transaction only makes things worse. This is a very rare example where
a well distributed network (100 miners having 1% each) is much much
worse than 3 miners having 33% each.
Using the my previous terminology, automatic fee-sharing ("ORBS") is a
solution to the freeze problem ("FRONT") but opens the windows to
"CHAKIDO" double-spending. and CHAKIDO double-spending is a much worse
problem than FRONT.
But as Tamas pointed out, sooner or later someone will implement
something like ORBS, get over the critical mass of miner adoption, and
then the CHAKIDO problem will be inevitable.
The only clean solution to this problem is the DECOR+ protocol, which
shares block-rewards by including "uncles" (as GHOST does) and splitting
the reward between all miners at the same height until coinbase maturity
is over. This way the best choice is always cooperative.
PS: Using so many acronyms makes arguments much more concise, but
suggest we should have all the attack terminology described in a single
"Bitcoin Security Wiki"...
|
|
|
|
ok, i'm sorry.
A nice start to see  BTW, if you're interested, I'd exchange a litecoin for an equivalent amount of BTC later this evening. i don't have enough btc for a whole ltc yet. i have only .007 btc |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
