I wanted to ask a question!! When can we expect a chat rainbot on Primedice? Sorry for being Off-Topic  It goes to active users , but who dont spam and such. And only when hui is online. Here check out rainbot faq : http://pdstats.co.nf/rainbot-faq.htmlyou mean active users on your website chat or who rolls actively and you dont have to participate in chat? I think you have to do both.. Cause it wouldnt make sense if the person got tipped without knowing about it, not being involved a word in chat. If you're talking about the rainbot in the current primedice (3) it's a third party bot made by user "hui" (an all-around nice person). as far as I know, hui's rainbot tips people who chat (I don't think you actually have to bet anything), but you do need to be not-beggging and behaving yourself. If you check out that faq you can find the answers to almost all of your questions, I'd imagine. |
|
|
|
You don't need to do anything, I know many altcoins were forked, and there were no hazard for fork actually, sometimes a coin is forked when it has new significant feature updated or parameter changed, like if btc's block time changes to 1 minutes, there will be a hard for. So you just need to upgrade your new wallet and your money won't be lost, take it easy.  Fox, he's talking about the "gavincoin" fork. Ie, the situation with block sizes and the potential hardfork in the network. Under this scenario, bitcoin forks and there's a (potential for) a situation where those who don't upgrade are on an "altcoin". |
|
|
|
You people are all so kind and I can't thank you enough.
(regarding the typo comment, I meant anything that seemed like a typo probably was)
The owner of coin gateway itself seemed like a lovely dude, he however also seemed to be the strongest link in a weak chain.
Oh, yah, maybe checkout that mixer advertized in kprawns' signature if you still need a mixer. bitmixer.io has been around for quite a while and I've never heard any complaints. |
|
|
|
Step #2 - Convert to Brainfuck for fun because you know why not.
Are you talking about brainfuck the language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck? Is there some kind of relevance for bumping this 2 week old thread? Do you actually want code for generating keys in brainfuck or where you just bumping your post count? No, I actually want someone to convert it to that language because not only would it be a pretty great challenge, but Brainfuck can easily be implemented on an Arduino (or literally any other platform), so it could actually serve to be a very useful function. I don't know anything about programming for Arduino, but I'm really surprised if you can't compile C code for it. And since you already have all the bitcoin core, there's also a libbitcoin in C, don't you already have what you need to convert keys on arduino? Also, isn't arduino just an arm7? Can't you run python on linux on it? Sorry for my ignorance. You are somewhat right, but it's not a 64-bit machine like Bitcoin Core is meant to run on though. It's not quite that easy, because it's memory is on the order of 16 KB. Brainfuck on the other hand, is SOOO easy to implement if all you need to do is generate an address. If it's SOOO easy, maybe you can do it yourself if you check out those python methods in that library I linked to above. I've never written a line of brainfuck in my life so I don't think I can help you. Cheers! |
|
|
|
Serious question.
What is bad about Quickseller being on the default trust list?
With Vod going into retirement, the Bitcoin community needs someone like that.
~BCX~
I don't think there's that much bad about him, though he can be jumpy as hell to make decisions. That's my primary concern but hopefully Quickseller is moving to address that anyway. This community needs more investigation, more question-asking and less jumping to conclusions. Hopefully you're correct about him changing his overly-destructive MO. Anyway, now that TC has removed him from default trust (again) perhaps it's time to let this thread die. The title is more than a little inflammatory, and quite outdated at this point. |
|
|
|
Aaand done. Almost Mitchell , few more things to fix ... @arallmuus, have you considered starting your own overview thread/list of sig campaigns? It seems that Mitchell is pretty overworked by this recently and you seem to be as on top of this news as anyone. Just an idea. Nope, Basically we dont need more of this kind of thread . This is the most compiled list of all signature campaigns and this should be the only one thread that people will start looking for if they want to search for signature campaign, having more than one in bitcointalk will be quite pointless (unless it is translated to a local language ofcourse) All good. It was just a suggestion because I could see that Mitchell has been getting quite busy and that you were posting here regularly with updates that it seemed like Mitchell wasn't keeping up with. For those who have been around a long time, we'll remember that Mitchell himself took over this thread from previous one when the original maintainer didn't have time any more to keep up. I didn't know if Mitchell was ready to pass the torch and if you were the one to receive it. Anyway, all seems resolved as hillarious has expressed interest to jump in. Cheers! |
|
|
|
Step #2 - Convert to Brainfuck for fun because you know why not.
Are you talking about brainfuck the language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck? Is there some kind of relevance for bumping this 2 week old thread? Do you actually want code for generating keys in brainfuck or where you just bumping your post count? No, I actually want someone to convert it to that language because not only would it be a pretty great challenge, but Brainfuck can easily be implemented on an Arduino (or literally any other platform), so it could actually serve to be a very useful function. I don't know anything about programming for Arduino, but I'm really surprised if you can't compile C code for it. And since you already have all the bitcoin core, there's also a libbitcoin in C, don't you already have what you need to convert keys on arduino? Also, isn't arduino just an arm7? Can't you run python on linux on it? Sorry for my ignorance. |
|
|
|
Vod, you have been the most active, the most impartial and one of the most awesome people I have ever seen in Bitcoin's Adventurous World... Would only urge you to please do not leave us in between, just don't sail in the boat alone, take Bitcoin World with you too, don't leave, please...  Uh, if you think Vod was impartial you clearly never read any of his posts related to Microsoft. I'm just saying, either you didn't know Vod or you don't know the meaning of the word "impartial".  |
|
|
|
marcotheminer, please don't promote/advertise your own stuff in my thread. It's off-topic and quite rude if you ask me.
I'll update the OP tomorrow. Way to tired right now, sorry for slacking so much guys.
It's completely on topic (signature campaigns). I'm just stating that I will have a collection soon (we're not competing businesses, not sure why it's such a big deal). Was a post deleted? I can't seem to find the post that Michell is complaining about. Aaand done. Almost Mitchell , few more things to fix ... @arallmuus, have you considered starting your own overview thread/list of sig campaigns? It seems that Mitchell is pretty overworked by this recently and you seem to be as on top of this news as anyone. Just an idea. |
|
|
|
Math is not very helpfull sometimes. I have a friend, who had ~85 000 bets with Martingale, made it from 0.2 to 7.5 BTC. At this period he never had more than 12 losses in a row. Which is only 1/2^13 = 1/4096 chance. He has played for 2 weeks, dreaming about new car And then .. 17 losses in a row. He should be clever enough to stop with big profits. But he continued - 20 losses in a row in next 5 mins.. All the next week he had only losses. Finally he busted all.  Wait, but that means that math is helpful. If he had done a little math and realized how much he was pushing his luck, he would have cashed out at 7.5 BTC, right? I'm saying, looking at the math on these unlikely scenarios can bring back a little sobriety to the drunken thrill of gambling (maybe!). |
|
|
|
CanaryInTheMine 1872: -0 / +193
Why not have Canary top tier?
Seems to fit Theymos criteria more than
Dogie or Quickseller or Diamond that is for certain.
From what I read, he was removed because people felt that he was adding people to his trust list based on feedback from his business or something like that. People who bought from him got on his trust list and then others began to think this was too inflated for default trust. Others have said that many other on default trust do the same thing. I don't really have an opinion on it. Also, FWIW, QS is no longer on default trust. |
|
|
|
[snip]
In perfect world it would be used for things such as china blocked this site, so allow people there to view this site. But sadly a lot of bad traffic goes through tor.
Right, and I'm also of the mindset that what I think is or isn't bad isn't an absolute. For example, presumably, the government censors in china think that the traffic that skips their censorship is "bad". So I admit a lot of grey area and say that freedom is better than censorship. However, even I disagree strongly with some stuff, and anyway... |
|
|
|
Thanks for no longer power tripping here! Re-owning the name TradeFortress. A less-ballsy move now that Vod is gone. Vod you and I disagreed from time to time, but I appreciate that you never made it personal. Happy sailing! |
|
|
|
My only glint of hope is that the minimum amount of bitcoin I'm able to mix has changed from 0btc to 2.02btc (a similar amount to what I put in).
@OP, when you said this (above), it looked like your coins were lost. What did you mean by the "minimum you could mix". I don't get it at all. Oh, I take it from your last post that you got the money back! That's a wonderful ending and I'm happy to hear it. So it seems like you got the important lesson for free  |
|
|
|
I don't know what good this thread does other than needlessly confuse the situation. It looks to be purely opinionated and not actualy based on any evidence. I think it's unfair to try blame QS or Marco just as much as it is to blame ndnhc in the first place. Without more evidence I don't think its fair to blame any of them in my opinion.
Actually, there's an itemized list of evidence 1-16 in the OP. The most damning, IMO, is the incredibly fast response time from QS in finding it. He made the same mistake when trolling me with an alt, necrobumping an old thread then "finding it" with his main within a super-short amount of time. Anyway, obviuosly the evidence isn't conclusive, but inconclusive evidence is still evidence. Your point 9 is also invalid, as this fact takes someone's word as fact which is heresy.
The spanish inquisition cries "heresy!". (lol, couldn't help myself; given that QS's overzealousness is basically his downfall, this typo was too ironic) I am saying that ndnhc's inability to access the forum for those three days is heresy and is impossible to prove. I would not take that as evidence to support his guilt or innocence. Whoa, even more heresy! Okay, time to be more helpful: quickseller, click here
The reason I removed the negative trust was because I wouldn't believe that you would be their signature campaign manager (from what it seems you also handle some of their PR related things as well) and then make the mistake of entering a giveaway after it had ended.
Wait, if taking someone else's word is heresy, then I think QS is asking us to become heretics too! I cannot speak to anything that anyone else did or did not do. However using a throwaway account is not straightening your case IMO.
I think he means "strengthening", but now I'm just being mean. |
|
|
|
The red color of the interface of the site is making eye tired, maybe change another color is much better.
Indeed the color it's to fiery for my eyes. I would like to see a friendly color for my eyes You can change the color as you want, just try bitbaby's suggestion (I think this is the simple way to change the color of any sites) Or try my suggestion just above it, you can learn your first javascript this way even if you've never coded before. It's really easy in a modern browser with the javascript consoles. |
|
|
|
Hey kid, thanks for sharing your voice here. Dont get in over your head, I cant nominate a "forum section (Meta)" to the default trust list. When US hosted the world cup, Fifa didnt grant every nation that continent to join the tournament. But in all seriousness, lets get this out of the way, I have no interest to get to the default trust depth, at least not now. But the fact that people are even considering 'voting' for me or in other case vouching for me - even as a joke - shows how flawed this system really is. The very reason that this topic exists is because I am trying to point out how useless and monopolized the trust system really is. Gaining trust is so damn easy, all you have to do is suck up to a couple of guys, bust some scams and viola! you are IN the top circle of the trust and all of a sudden you have the power to declare that this person is suspicious, I am a "COP", I have a gun and I'll shoot this bastard down. No I am not comparing guys like Quickie Boy to real cops but stating how things can get out of hands. There are more than one instance where this theory has failed and has ruined a profile and you know what gives next ? The person simply recreates a another account or even better BUYS A HIGH REP ACCOUNT and the fact that a same IP is allowed to create / own multiple accounts is also appalling. I know banning multiple IP logins isnt fair but at least create a tracking system like Bitlendingclub where similar IP accounts are shown to the public. We are at the forefront of the Bitcoin revolution on this forum and this forum is riddled with cheap politics like this, WE NEED TO CHANGE.I agree with the thurst of this post pretty wholeheartedly. I find it quite ironic that there's a trust system where people are jockeying for trust points and others are playing cops-and-robbers with it, meanwhile the "cops" are selling accounts so the whole thing is a kind of nonsense. Did you guys see the sarcastic thread in meta a few weeks ago where the guy proposed selling trust directly? People flipped out and didn't get the irony. "You can't buy and sell trust!" they exclaimed. But you can buy and sell trusted accounts. Alas. People love points and points systems, especially the kind of people who play a lot of video games and hang out on forums. Anyway, you put these trust points out there, people gonna jockey for them. There's a lot of nonsense to it but to hear it from the trust rangers, you'd think they were saving the world from evil. |
|
|
|
I don't mean to take away from idea of a bitcoin through tor it's a interesting idea. I'm all for spreading the network.
And I appolgize if it did not come out right. I mean for example if you have a static IP and it's a exit node and some one spams, or does boting with google. It would be a pain to have to type capatcha all the time on google if your node was used for bad. Being flagged from sites as a bad IP.
But I guess you are right if no one put's other traffic through that port it would not matter. And of course ISP i agree no matter what IP they have a record.
In my experience, I have to type in a captcha to use google whenever I'm browsing with TOR. You don't have to be doing bad stuff to be forced by google to solve a captcha. Sorry in advance if I misunderstood you somewhere. The reason is the IP's have been flagged by google. If your IP is not flagged you can search without needing to do a capatcha. Granted running tor does not mean it will happen. (espically this tor will be just bitcoin traffic it sounds like). This is what might happen if "bad traffic" is sent to your exit node - https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/86640?hl=enOh, right, I see what you mean. If you got flagged while running an exit node then you might have to deal with those captchas even while browing not through tor, because your IP would be tor-marked. Sorry, I think my brain is only running on half-speed today. |
|
|
|
Multibit has no "check for upgrades" feature AFAIK.
I double checked, you are right. I must have been remembering either an older version of multibit which had this feature or something else entirely---more likely the latter as why would they remove such a feature. In any case, you can click "about multibit" and see your current version along with the url of the multibit website ( https://multibit.org/) where you can double-check that your version is the latest |
|
|
|
Can you say why these particular numbers are any more interesting than sha256 hashes of transactions? I don't really get it yet. You would still get sha256 hashes from mining blocks, but very particular ones, as you would get 9 out of the sum of its digits, in base 10, and of a few powers of them, as well. It would be a bit like finding new digits of the number PI. Why do it? For research. But PI is the natural ratio of the radius of a circle to it's circufrence---surely a useful thing to know more about. I don't get it with these 9s yet. It may prove useful in the future.
I think this would not be better than finding new digits of PI but also not worse. It is at least something you can show other people as an achievement.
Pretty much the same reason athletes and so, keep doing all sorts of efforts to beat records. Human achievement, curiosity about our limits, research...
This might not convince you but there you go, here is my answer.
We could then say that bitcoin is backed by something and has intrinsic value: it would be finding rare and precious numbers.
And in the end, it might even prove to be useful knowing such numbers. It's better than nothing, at least, I think.
Here is a story about a number:
~ The Hardy–Ramanujan number: 1729
This number got its start when British mathematician G. H. Hardy visited Indian mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan while Ramanujan was ill in the hospital. Hardy later recalled:
"I remember once going to see him when he was ill at Putney. I had ridden in taxi cab number 1729 and remarked that the number seemed to me rather a dull one, and that I hoped it was not an unfavorable omen. ‘No,’ [Ramanujan] replied, ‘it is a very interesting number; it is the smallest number expressible as the sum of two cubes in two different ways.’ "
The two cubes are 1729 = 1^3 + 12^3 = 9^3 + 10^3. Numbers that are the smallest number expressible as the sum of two positive cubes in n distinct ways are called “taxicab numbers” for just this reason.
Well, maybe we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm glad you find these 9s beautiful. But it sems to me that the story of the 1729 is just a reminder of the fact that any number is sure to have a set of unique properties--that's what makes it different from every other number. Maybe who finds which properties "beautiful" is just a matter for tastes, I dunno. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
