The miners are currently being paid an equivalent of about $324000 per day through the block reward. (about 90 USD per BTC, 25 BTC per block, 144 blocks per day)
Do you think this amount is a reasonable amount to keep the network going?
Nope. SELL SELL SELL! |
|
|
|
we will negotiate how we will handle our situation or i will not handle my situation with my buyers.
to show i am serious i will handle my situation with one of my buyers. when that happens we will negotiate our situation. deal?
Terribly sorry Mr. scammer, but this is not a negotiation. |
|
|
|
lets start negotiating now.
I'm afraid you'll have to wait until after. I do not currently regard your bet as being honorable, neither do the moderators and admins. Thanks for understanding. I'll be happy to negotiate the settlement after your situation is handled. Cheers. |
|
|
|
hey matthew,
i have PM'd you regarding our bet. are you going to honor our bet?
I've been advised of your situation and to take you seriously-- once all the people have been paid back from your scams. At that point, yes, I will message you in regards to a settlement. Although that may sound hypocritical, we all know that a great majority of the betters were not planning on paying if they lost (they even admitted to me in PM and refused payment), so it is impossible to take someone seriously who is currently actively admitting to both being a scammer and having scammed at the time of the bet. That said, fix that little problem and we're back in order. |
|
|
|
I am jesus, we all are jesus. I'm the one actually taking the role of Jesus here, though. I'm dying so you don't have to.
And people wonder why I used to think you might be Atlas. |
|
|
|
In addition to that, the market price seems to be from an expanding market, rather than speculation.
I agreed with everything you said up until this part. For a "currency" that is still basically controlled by a handful of exchange owners, investors and business men, and the ability imitate legitimate transactions on a daily basis in any volume you like, it's impossible to make any assumptions as to the reasoning behind the price that don't also support claims of being a pump and dump. I'd be careful of making those assumptions about the reason for prices. To me for example, it just looks like the people who already had shittons of money and believe in Bitcoin are simply dumping more of their money into it in a panic. It absolutely is possible for this to be just a giant circle jerk. Only time will tell. |
|
|
|
IF this is true, (and I cannot stress that if enough), I believe the scammer tag shouldn't have been applied to dank.
LOL. You must be new here. I wouldn't say "new", but a lot newer than you. I take it you think he's full of shit? He got the scammer tag by borrowing money and then never paying back, by offering something else in return and never delivering, then immediately asking for more money to buy drugs and claiming it's for him to die and return as Jesus (that drug obviously being LSD). |
|
|
|
To clarify, it's not something I want to do, it's something I suspect could be done by ASIC developers (mining before shipping). When I go to blockchain.info, it shows a pie chart showing the dissection of mining pools and their hashing speed. When a new block is found, it shows that IP with a label for which pool it came from. This is why I ask-- couldn't someone just change their IP everytiume they submitted to make it look like they were multiple individuals and not the same miner/pool?
The IP address you're referring to is the IP address of the node that first relayed the block. It is possible that someone with a better connection may appear as a large ''miner'' if he relays a block created by the actual miner. There was a bit of ''panicking'' a while back over this. Oh that's hilarious. I wasn't here during that time and missed that one. Thank you. So blockchain.info's chart for network hashing division is based on relayed blocks then? |
|
|
|
Would it be possible to have a script that connects through different proxies *each time* your ASIC were to ask for new work, and thus make the network think that you were different miners all with the same hashing speed?
Is this about pools or solo? Cause the blockchain doesn't save the ip of the block finder, so your already masked in the respect. Basically I'm trying to see if it'd be possible for someone like BFL to be mining right now with their ASICs and us not know about it, because instead of consistently mining blocks, they'd be jumping around to different IPs to make it look like different computers doing small amounts of work. |
|
|
|
Maybe you'd be better off just explaining what you want to do.
No one anywhere is going to get confused about your hashing speed. No one counts work requests as speed, they count work returned.
The getwork protocol doesn't care about IPs, but the tracking database might, so your work may or may not be accepted at all, depending on the server you are talking to. Stratum uses a persistent connection, and I don't know the protocol in enough detail to know whether or not it will accept (on the protocol level) work on one connection that was given out on a different connection.
To clarify, it's not something I want to do, it's something I suspect could be done by ASIC developers (mining before shipping). When I go to blockchain.info, it shows a pie chart showing the dissection of mining pools and their hashing speed. When a new block is found, it shows that IP with a label for which pool it came from. This is why I ask-- couldn't someone just change their IP everytiume they submitted to make it look like they were multiple individuals and not the same miner/pool? |
|
|
|
He'll be treating like a king when I'm gone.
This is likely in the event he's the reason you're gone. |
|
|
|
Sure. And if you can find a pool that pays based on work requested rather than work completed, PM me.
I didn't mean to sound like the miner wouldn't be doing any work, but I wasn't aware it needed to be connected while doing the work other than to *submit* the actual work once a share/block was found. I don't understand the process completely is why I'm asking. I have this picture in my head of a miner asking for work, switching to another IP address, submitting that work, rinsing, repeating, and masking the fact that it's a single ASIC. Would that work? |
|
|
|
|
Would it be possible to have a script that connects through different proxies *each time* your ASIC were to ask for new work, and thus make the network think that you were different miners all with the same hashing speed?
|
|
|
|
The flaw is idiot level. It's something that I assume was explored, methods against it were conceived and mostly implemented and someone forgot to upload it.
It had to have been something like that.
Good news though we're talking about at most a hundred coins.. Not thousands
Send them an email, tell them that you will take the coins so they are safe and no one else steal them (if someone else steal the coins, you'll be on the hook for it since you contacted them) Grab the coins and email them and telling them you did it to prevent a not so honest person do the same.. I'm sure when they see the issue, they'll understand. What about taking the coins then sending them to a known address of the company or company's owner. That might work. Sure, whatever, but if the coins are left there in the open, someone else might find that flaw and actually steal the coins. I'd grab them and send them to an address and then simply give them the private key once they acknowledge how stupid they are. They better reward you or at least offer you a reward even if you choose not to accept it! I tried exactly this once with a popular social media site half a decade ago, and they pretended to be thankful for finding the glaring security holes and kept asking me for more help and even asked for me to write up some security suggestions for them. They even offered me points on their website for a reward and such, and because I accepted, they tried to later say that I had blackmailed them. Turns out, they were trying to collect information to post about me and brand me as a "blackmailer hacker". They even recorded our phone calls (which was illegal in their state and thus they didn't use it). The employees who did this were subsequently fired of course by the corporate owners who took over the company and brought in an entirely new management group that I became friends with. Moral of the story? There isn't one. Some people are dicks and you have to do what you do and deal with it as it comes. |
|
|
|
The flaw is idiot level. It's something that I assume was explored, methods against it were conceived and mostly implemented and someone forgot to upload it.
It had to have been something like that.
Good news though we're talking about at most a hundred coins.. Not thousands
Send them an email, tell them that you will take the coins so they are safe and no one else steal them (if someone else steal the coins, you'll be on the hook for it since you contacted them) Grab the coins and email them and telling them you did it to prevent a not so honest person do the same.. I'm sure when they see the issue, they'll understand. What about taking the coins then sending them to a known address of the company or company's owner. That might work. |
|
|
|
The flaw is idiot level. It's something that I assume was explored, methods against it were conceived and mostly implemented and someone forgot to upload it.
It had to have been something like that.
Good news though we're talking about at most a hundred coins.. Not thousands
Hmm.. Not responding to emails, only holds a hundred coins... sounds like a bitgem ripoff site or gambling site to me. |
|
|
|
There is no issue if you disclose their name publicly. They could be pointed to this thread, or contacted by other means and people, if we know who they are.
If the flaw is truly boneheaded, disclosing the name might be risky. Indeed. 1. I will not steal or publish the results.
I had a few hundred coins stolen from me 2 years ago, at today's prices it would be $20,946.88
I do not wish that to happen to anyone ever.
2. I attempted for a second time to inform the company, no response yet. When it comes in I will let you guys know what I found and how the exploit happened... that's after giving the owners time to correct the problem.
I got blasted via private message on bitcointalk for not publishing the exploit and stealing coins.
I hope that a few years from now if I was on the other side of the table people would handle it like this rather than freaking stealing coins. If people were Honourable they would reward this type of behaviour rather than sending private messages like that...
Remember a few years back I called you because your site dropped off the internet and i wanted to see if you were okay? Well, now I know. You're okay.  |
|
|
|
I hate the idea of "suggesting" a meme, they're supposed to happen naturally. But this is pretty funny.
Whatever works. Someone has to create the first image, no? I think the complaints of it feeling forced aren't so much about someone creating one as part of a marketing agenda (which is forced in itself), but that they simply aren't...well, funny. I guess you didn't read his last sentence that you quoted. "But this is pretty funny." I was referring to *all* complaints in this thread, sorry for not making that clearer. I get the quote was confusing. |
|
|
|
The original google doc with all folks on the opposite side of the bet was deleted so there is no evidence for the folks who bet against Matt (like myself) using our #bitcoin-otc nicks instead of posting in the thread.
Sorry - still a scammer in my book unless you bring back the original google doc.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=140654Theymos and JohntheDong are keeping score on that thread. If you were one of the people betting, please contact Theymos directly, prove your identity (the one I'm assuming is from the OTC?) and then he will PM me and I'd be happy to open discussions for settlement. Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
