While I do read more and more news that are trying to imply that the world may have avoided a recession for now, the news from China are still overly concerning.
The number of people infected is very high and keeps rising rapidly, the death toll is overly big too, so this is far from good news. I don't know how is the economy going, but this may not end well. And what happens in China, doesn't stay/remain in China, we all know that.

With Electrum on default settings?! Or you have a special build (or setting??!) for Electrum?
I would like to try the same, but when trying with Fulcrum I've seen those messages in the log and I thought that Electrum has failed me (I've waited with Electrum on Fulcrum more than 30 minutes before giving up).

Here there are imho two problems, and the server is the smallest one.

According to the documentation, in order to allow this kind of addresses, Fulcrum may need in config something like:
max_history = 25000000

Also according to what I've read, Electrs may also offer a similar option in config or command line, but I don't know if it's
index-lookup-limit = 1000 (is it enough?)
or
txid_limit = 1000 (or more?)

However, I could not get any success, I've got in logs the nefarious
WARNING | NotificationSession | MemoryError('dropping message over 1,000,000 bytes and re-synchronizing')

And from what I've read here, in order to fix this, Electrum itself needs a change in the code ^{MAX_INCOMING_MSG_SIZE in interface.py}, and then recompiled.

So my few tests are irrelevant, it seems. I've done more reading than testing.


PS. I start hating Fulcrum. It starts up too slow from my external HDD, while Electrs is lightning fast on that.

Yes.


It's there. Only the UK cannot access it, thanks to the fine logic (/s) of the justice in UK. The rest of the world is fine.


Nothing special.


Yes.


Because you're nobody, unless you can prove anytihng.
Of course, you can sue him, I won't stop you.


For now, just another sad wannabe on the list.

It was added to the winner's amount?  (I don't know for sure).
It has increased the "ending time" with 140+ blocks? (I am 99% sure it did).
This means that it was seen as a smaller (non-winning) separate bid, no matter the originating address.

So it can be "the expected behavior", just it must be documented.

First of all, big thank you to the few ones who managed to answer to this without quoting all the names (ie without triggering my notifications for nothing).

Now, to the topic: sorry BitcoinGirl.Club, but icopress is not wrong. The only reason I didn't leave red feedback was because I was sure other will do that. And while too much red feedback is useless in this case, at least one is a must. OK, when the missing money is paid back or resolved as debt with the involved people, then it can become neutral. But until then.. it has to be there. Else everybody will become campaign manager until the first big payment they can "lose" (and, why not, beyond). I am not telling that julerz12 is a thief (I don't know and it doesn't matter). What I'm telling that this kind of mishaps, if not handled, can give ideas to others.
Plus, indeed, he's also not wrong about the fact that red feedback doesn't stop people still do campaign management.

"What would you feel and do if you are in the same shoe of julerz12" <- this is bad approach. He did make a big mistake in handling money, and we don't talk about 5$ here. And while people get red tag for asking "no collateral loans" of 100$, he has lost ... 50x more.

But, with a bit of political skills, julerz12 can easily turn icopress' feedback to neutral. All he has to do is discuss with the campaigns he was handling and "convert" the missing money into debt with clear agreements about paying that back, and where that is not possible, maybe lend some money too for covering all this. Loans are neutral feedback. And then he can go on.
I mean, even some of the current big exchanges have lost users' money, but they've paid back soon enough and kept pretty good reputation. It can be done. Not cheap, but it can be done.

I see, like every time this kind of things happen, people go more for the drama than for being helpful.
Of course, the first impulse after reading this is the drama. But that was yesterday. Let's be helpful today. 5k is not the end of the world, at least one of the campaigns have shown understanding and I think that a rationale discussion can easily take place. So, with some more luck, it should not be that hard for julerz12 to "patch" a little this fuckup.

Fiind la capitolul MetaMask, am citit azi un paragraf despre (inca?) un fel de phishing bazat pe MetaMask, si poate ca ii sta mai bine aici decat altundeva (presa sau mai stiu eu ce).
Originalul, in engleza, este partea cu ‘Blank Check’ eth_sign phishing de la https://cointelegraph.com/news/5-sneaky-tricks-crypto-phishing-scammers-used-last-year-slowmist

Si zice acolo ca te poti trezi cu MetaMask cerandu-ti o semnatura, ceea ce mi se pare destul de cuminte, adica si cu potofelul hardware nu ti se pare ciudat sa semnezi (e doar o semnatura, nu e seed sau cheie privata), pentru ca mai apoi sa foloseasca acea semnatura si in alte locuri pentru a-ti fura banii.

Na, e clar ca daca nu ai de trimis bani, nu ai ce semna, dar daca chiar ai de trimis...? Utilizatori de MetaMask, sunteti draguti sa imi ziceti ce imi scapa?

Since I am doing tests with Fulcrum right now, I can tell you:
I took some 70 seconds, but it opened it (Fulcrum + BTC-RPC-Explorer).
It shows only 10 transactions per page, 8822 pages, but clicking on the pages load up pretty fast.

Si mai bine! Ma bucur pentru voi!


Ma ocup imediat.


Ei, vazusem ca a concurat si chiar ma gandisem ca s-ar putea sa apara asemenea "probleme".
Era un banc intr-o vreme:

No cam asa si acest suparat. Si legat de "neica nimeni".. fiecare este centrul universului sau, iar la unii ego-ul este prea mare sa vada cat de mici sunt. Dar ce sa facem? Mergem mai departe. (Iar despre permaban, e treaba moderatorilor; nu cunosc subiectul, nu are rost sa ma bag. Am vazut ca are un pic de rosu, clar, fum fara foc nu iese, dar la ora asta nu am rabdare sa sap.).

Sorry to say, but this is the first smart thing I see in that long post.
Get your computer cleaned and start using your Ledger for literally every cent.
I know that tough days are ahead, but I can guess that people will care much more to know they'll get their money back than whether it was a hack or not.

I wish you best of luck. You'll need it.

The way I see it is: he took responsibility of holding money that's not his own and now that money is gone.
The responsibility... still remains and, I guess it won't be easy, but he will have to handle that.

It's not uncommon somebody has to pay from his own pocket for this kind of mistakes.
And, unfortunately, it's also not uncommon that even after paying from his own pocket, his good name on the forum remains (somewhat) tainted.

No matter how good or bad are @julerz12 intentions, tough days are ahead.  


Edit: I see that he also realized all this

It can be an old staked address, or he can use a new address for being escrow, or he can use new address for each job.
But, very important, in the last two cases the new address(es) have to be first "sealed" with a signed message coming from an old staked address.


That post you linked shows how a perfect storm can be made.
We get a campaign manager that's not that old in the business and maybe not too technical either.
We get a campaign that doesn't want to pay the price of more established campaign managers.
We get a lot of non-technical people in the campaign so they don't notice that the "signature" on those funds can hold bad surprises.
And then *spoof*, the money is gone and the campaign manager admits it that the has a hardware wallet, but he didn't use it for those funds (ffs!).
Are the money stolen by the manager or from the manager, it doesn't even matter.


I am sure that Gazeta can do much better (i.e. not getting even close to having funds stolen/lost). And if he has technical doubts, he is not afraid to ask.

I know that you are not only a reputable member of the community, but also a careful one, but in the light of some recent events, I will come with two advises (which I hope you already know and follow, but better one too much than one too few) :

* Always use messages signed with your address and ask the same from the parties of the deals. Make sure the parts are aware that only such signed messages are meaningful. Impersonation is a big risk in your business.
* Always store all the funds you need to work with on hardware wallet or cold storage. Just now a campaign manager has opened a topic saying that he got hacked and lost 5000$.

Interesant mod de desfasurare! Si nici premiul nu e rau deloc, chiar si daca probabil este vorba de 25$, nu 50$.
Dar nu voi participa. Am avut niste discutii in contradictoriu cu omul (eu cred ca exagereaza in legatura cu cel putin o persoana), asadar nu ar fi frumos/normal sa particip la concursul lui. Nu este vorba de vreo vrajba/suparare pe care as tine-o, ci pur si simplu asa mi se pare corect.

Asadar, multa bafta voua, celor care participati (sper sa fie mai multi romani)!

Very correctly stated. And, as a matter of fact, I've already seen another Reputation thread exactly on this: people asking who's to be blamed / tagged for the loses.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5433651.0;topicseen

(Of course, as usual, it's not the campaign members asking this in new thread; but that's another story.)

The first question is: where were you holding that money? Was it in a hot wallet? Because if so, it was a big mistake, no bounty manger should hold such funds without a proper setup - cold storage, hardware wallet, maybe even multisig.

If it was a hot wallet that got emptied, you'll need to see what you have installed on the computer(s) and/or smartphone(s) you've accessed that wallet with.
If it's a cold wallet, you'll have to see how you've generated it and where you've stored the safety backup/seed.

Expecting the thieves give you back that money is, sorry to say, pretty much a hope in vain and also counterproductive.


LE: wow, you have Ledger and still used a hot wallet. Impressive! How could you go this wrong?!? 

My guess would be that he has thought it over or found out that posting private key info can get his funds stolen, hence he decided to remove that. A bit late though, since it already got a backup...

I've got Fulcrum build his database during the week-end. It grew to 112.7GB. Not small, but not too big.

The first config had a lot of values on default and Fulcrum started trying to connect to a lot of peers after the sync.
For a second run I've turned more things off, but Bitcoin RPC Explorer only just gave me errors.
A third run was the lucky one.

The first request for address info was very slow though. Afterwards (for other addresses, clearly), all explorer requests were fast.
The fill up of wallet data in Electrum, afterwards, was also OK.

The only problem is that for now Fulcrum data in on the SSD I've done the initial download with. Now I'll move everything to the HDD designated for the job. It'll make the things slower, clearly, but you've got the test you aimed for.

Some recommendations for the config on the normal run:


During the initial sync I also had:


I cannot tell more. Optimal would be that maybe somebody does a really good look into the code. But I won't.
I am still deciding whether to use or not Fulcrum for long term. It's nice to have so simple "setup" on Windows, but Electrs is already configured too.
Speed is nice too. I hope it helps anybody. Maybe we get more feedback too.
These days I'll add Fulcrum to that docu/install topic too.

Și eu tot așa știu: Trust Wallet nu este complet Open Source, sau cel puțin nu era ultima dată când citisem despre subiect. Deci ceea ce zic ei (că ar fi Open Source) este o minciună. Iar regula de bază în lucrul cu banii este că dacă cineva a mințit o dată, să nu îl mai crezi, indiferent ce zice, că altfel, mai devreme sau mai târziu, o să te arzi.

Iar comparația cu Coinbase Wallet nu ține. Faptul că există variante mai proaste nu îl face pe acesta bun.


Pentru unele monede alternative există variante derivate (forks) de Electrum. Clar, pentru foarte puține și cred că este vorba doar de proiecte foarte asemănătoare cu Bitcoin.
Nu știu cât de bun e acel Wallet Connect... poate că o fi Open Source, dar cel mai probabil este insufficient testat și am văzut câte minuni se întâmplă fiindcă lumea se aruncă să folosească programe netestate cu banii lor. Deci... nu e convingător.


Din câte îmi amintesc, s-a și întâmplat așa ceva. Nu cu Metamask. Cineva a intrat undeva unde nu trebuia și a pus o actualizare de care tu zici că nu se poate întâmpla. Îmi pare tare rău că nu îmi amintesc numele extensiei să caut și să pot să dau sursa informației...


Clar, asta este o problemă mult mai frecventă, și, spre deosebire de programele pe care le poți da jos și să le verifici semnăturile, aici nu poți face așa ceva, deci ești legat la ochi. Bucuria hoților.


Corect, dar acesta este alt subiect, și nu unul prea interesant. Dacă sistemul e compromis.. nu poți avea așteptări de bine.


Păi ideea ar fi să ai banii în siguranță, că sunt bani. Deci optim ar fi să folosească, mai ales începătorul, portofel hardware cu MetaMask.
Și până acum nu m-a convins nimeni că e absolut sigur și nu poate vreun token, bridge sau ce o mai fi, să nu producă vreo surpriză.
Teoretic ar trebui să nu fie problemă, că portofelul hardware ar trebui să dea doar informații publice sau semnături. Practic, am auzi povești de groază care încep cu introducerea în MetaMask a cuvintelor de seed pentru portofel (clar, nu știu dacă e vorba de MetaMask sau o clonă), ceea ce nu are voie să se întâmple când se lucrează cu portofel hardware și m-ar bucura tare mult să confirmi sau infirmi că MetaMask cere așa ceva.


Pentru unii neajunsuri, pentru alții nu
Eu în timp am concluzionat că cele mai multe (99.9%) monede alternative nu merită atenția, așa că nu mă deranjează atât de mult că Electrum e "limitat" (nu e limitare, e bine așa) la Bitcoin.
Atomic nu știu. Sparrow e o alegere mai bună, dar, din nou, cred că e doar pentru Bitcoin.


De acesta am auzit și mai puțin. Mare atenție cu Binance chain, că este extrem de centralizat. Poate aduce bani dacă ești atent și te pricepi, dar poate să facă surprize neplăcute tot la fel de ușor (de la bani blocați la infrastructura complet picată dacă vreodată Binance sau CZ au probleme).
Nu spun să eviți, e treaba ta, eu doar avertizez că nu e înțelept să ai prea mulți bani acolo (inclusiv BNB, BUSD sau versiunea Binance de wrapped Bitcoin).


Mai este și abordarea majorității: vezi ce și cum au instalat cei mai mulți, faci ca ei și speri că e totul în regulă. Și de obicei este în regulă, că majoritatea nu știe (sau îi e lene) să facă toate acele verificări. Ideea mai importantă e să nu faci mișcări greșite (pe care poate că majoritatea nu le face), vezi introdusul de seed al portmoneului hardware în MetaMask...

Mempool space shows some +11% the estimated next difficulty change. I didn't recheck the calculations, but I am sure I didn't have this big numbers.