http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/04/30/174218/bitcoin-is-disrupting-the-argentine-economy

From NYT and featured on slashdot.  Just thought I'd let y'all know!

We can call it boneheaded but everyone certainly has the right to try to look out for themself and their own safety.  Certainly it'll be a little annoying to have to use tor when in USA but in the end, there's a solution available so I'm not mad

Yah, pretty colors

I've tried chainroll and it works well.  I wish these guys good luck with the campaign.  At the moment, dice playing has a lot of competition, however, with primedice closing off deposits for USA Ips this may end up perfectly timed for them to try to get a little more notoriety.

I can't speak to the facts concerning most of these threads.  I, however, was the victim of a smear attack by quickseller in which he deployed an alt to troll me and then dug into my past until he found a false accusation by a known scammer (from years ago) and then used it as a reason to neg-rep me with his main account.  He did this in a (failed) attempt to get me kicked out of the signature ad campaign I was a part of, presumably as vengence for crossing him in public (ie, calling him out for his hotheadedness and suggesting that calling people idiots is not called for).  That's my experience with him, as to the rest of these threads, you'll have to take them on their merits, I think.

I've disagreed with Vod in the past many times regarding his enforcement of Microsoft policies and intellectual properties.  Three striking differences between Vod and Quickseller which I notice are that (1) Vod maintains his cool and doesn't resort to name-calling and mudslinging when people disagree with him; (2) Vod actually removes negative trust when people talk with him about it (ie, he doesn't try to hold people's pasts over their heads for all time); (3) Vod doesn't seem to go on vendetta missions in which he's going to give negative trust to anyone who disagrees with him (if this were the case, I'd have negative trust from him since I don't agree that Microsoft policies should be dictating trust ratings on this board).

The other thing to keep in mind is that quickseller is a known account farmer/seller so in adding neg-reps to accounts, he's actually driving up the value of his non-neg-repped farmed accounts.  It's a black and white case of conflict of interest.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest

As far as I know, Vod has not been associated with any such behaviors.

I poked around a bit in that library, I see where in an example "import socket" is used to send to a local IP.  I guess socket uses TCP for the connection.  However, like the OP, I'd also be interested in knowing if it's possible to connect in this way to any particular full node.  

@OP, the blockchain tool to accept a raw transaction over HTTP is here: https://blockchain.info/pushtx

Got it.  I see clearly in blockchain.info that they've choked on that 0.03 output.  Can you reasonably easily let me know what's going on with this one (since it's not an unspendable output AND it's not encodable as an address (or as a series of addresses, ie, a multisig requirement))?

Thanks again, sincerely, for helping me/us learn about this.  I'm pushing back on you a bit here because I have often seen posts from the more technically informed saying "there are no addresses!!!", but I'm not convinced that they are entirely halluncinated artifacts.  I'm thinking that people are saying "there are no addresses" with such finality because they're trying to emphasize a point which is going to help newbies or those who don't have time to understand the subtleties.  However, for those of us who are curious about the actual state of affairs, I'm just trying to squeeze you for a few more details.  Thanks again!

Also, do you happen to have the list of the script codes which can be in a valid output (or know where to find it on a web-page, or in the source code for bitcoin-core)? Perhaps that page would answer my questions without you haveing to write to me so much

The rules weren't provided to me until *after* I was booted, despite my having asked tradefortress what were the rules for bots, where to find them, etc.  Nevertheless, this is off topic here, let's leave it

Of course they're also not comparable in that Micon was the "spokesman" and "pokerpro" for sealswithclubs but wasn't an owner/operator.  On the other hand, I think Stunna is the owner/operator of primedice.

Anyway, thanks MICRO for the clarification about using tor/vpn.

Right, reread what I said and I can see how that could have seemed like I was implying he didn't get paid.  My intention wasn't to speculate about that but to emphasize that dadice (and staff/employees) have every right to decide who to work with and under what terms.  He might find your reasons to be "bs" but I don't think you guys have to defend them.  If, for whatever reason, you told me: "look, I'm sorry but we're not hiring advertizers who have usernames that start with a 't'" then I'd surely wonder about the motivation, but at the end of the day, it's up to you to decide who you want to hire and your own criteria for it.

He learned the word "smear campaign" from me when I called him out for doing exactly that against me.   In some sense, worhiper_-_, he's right that this thread isn't going to get him to back down.  I think there's not a single example of a time when he backed down or admitted he was wrong.  When someone crosses him, they immediately get called "idiot" "dumbass" etc (it's easy to see this, just search through his posts).  When someone calls him out or asks why he goes into inspector clausier mode and starts saying "where were you on the night of the 5th?"  "do you deny having not denied having admitted that I denied that I was not the man you thought I was?" etc.

Essentially, this is the kind of person that only shows respect to people he sees as powerful so the only real recourse here is to wait until badbear takes him back off his trust list.  This is the way trust works, at the moment, badbear has shown trust in QS and Theymos shows trust in BadBear.  Once badbear sees the way QS uses this new authority to abuse and shout at those with less authority, that will start to go back on Badbear unless he fixes his own trust list.  Since he is away, we can't expect him to act on this until he has a chance to get back and look over things.

The reign of terror is a real but (I believe) temporary state-of-affairs around here.

I don't find any such feedback on your trust page.  I see one from QS saying he escrowed for you and it went fine.  I see several from you saying that QS is the man.  Perhaps I'm missing something or perhaps it was removed.  Nevertheless, you notably chimed in echoing quickseller's echoing of tradefortress charges against me during quickseller's smear attack on me, even adding facts which where clearly incorrect, saying "bots were against the rules on coinchat" (they weren't).  Since then I've noticed that you're constantly on the side of the poweful in these discussions on meta.  I apologize if I'm out of line, but that's been my observations.

I understand.  FWIW, you guys probably need to get a lot more players before you worry too much about developing new clients.  Nevertheless, I'm finding that when I sit down at the micro stakes ring table, usually someone or two will come by and play.  Never seen more than 3 or 4 though.  Still, it's headed in the right direction!

Next level for this site is to get an android app going.  I know I used to love relaxing and playing some low-stakes bitcoin poker on my android device while "watching" a movie with the girlfriend.

There are vanity pools that use the split key technique so that you've got guarnteed saftey, but if these online vanitygens aren't doing that, then it certainly is dangerous.

Lol, you know what they say "no press is bad press".  Funny that you've still got a url for dadice.com in that fuck you sig.  Anyway, I have to say that at the end of the day, it has to be up to dadice and colleagues to decide for themselves who to pay and why.  I mean, clearly they're under no obligation to run this campaign, they have every right to decide how they want to spend their money, right?

I agree wholeheatedly with the latter.  I have two negatives from quickseller and his alt, and one of them is a simply an echo of an unfounded accusation by tradefortress, a known scammer.  I would love to be able to have something on my trust page which makes this more clear.  Obviously, you can find this out by digging and by looking to see if I gave reciprocal feedback (I did), but being able to reply directly to the feedback would be useful, IMO.

He doesn't have to have proof.  All he has to have is his own suspicions.  In general, this wouldn't be a problem.  Where it is a problem is that:

1) He's on default trust so his accusations carry weight until someone takes the time to look around meta and see what he's been doing to people
2) He sells account so the more he negreps people's accounts the more he drives up the market for his own account farming/account sales.


Actually anyone who disagrees with him in any way is asking to be abused.  As you can see, he quickly loses his temper and goes off namecalling and when I called him out for his hotheadedness, he went off and trolled me with an alt and then dug up some false accusations and used them as a basis to neg rep my account.

You don't actually have to do much to get on his bad side and once you are on his bad side he'll stop at nothing to try to smear you using his default-trust status.

lol and double lol.  sorry, couldn't help but point out the irony in this failed quickseller masterbation.  love that he managed to do a spelling and grammar fail in the very sentence in which he was stroking himself about spelling and grammar ...back to our regularly scheduled mudslinging controversy ...


MZ, I know you're always careful to support whoever you see as the most powerful in a given context, but how on earth would you have any information about what account the person known (inter alia) as Quickseller considers to be his "main account"?

I believe you can, there's specific code in the cgminer repo for antminer s3: http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/antminer/s3/

Your setup will be a little bit dependent on your platform, on linux, I usually just download the source for cgminer and do "./configure && make && sudo make install".  And sometimes there's some option for ./configure which you want to use to make sure that you're supporting your specific miner hardware.

Probably you should go ahead and get started and post back here when/if you actually get stuck.

I see.  Thanks for turning up that example.  So, I think you're emphasizing that because the output is a script the script coulde be malformed, unconventional, etc and therefore no output address(es) could be found for that.  Are all of these cases unspendable bitcoins?  How can someone satisify the requirements to spend the bitcoins sent to that output which is not representatble as an address?

EDIT: Actually, heh, maybe a total of zero satoshis sent to the unrepresentable-as-address output doesn't provide a good situation for your to explain how they could be spent.  But if that had been a non-zero output to that unrepresentable-as-address output, could it be spent?