"Gameskins" You mean weapon skins for games such as CSGO? CSDeals by far offered the best rates for selling/buying for certain skins due to their low fees. Last time I checked them they didn't require KYC, but I believe they do now. There's also bitskins which also requires KYC for BTC withdrawals. They also have a min 5% fee on sales. I believe they were by far the most popular alternative to the steam market, much cheaper too. I've never heard of gamerall. I would never give my kyc to any of these exchanges though, they're as unregulated as they come.
Actually sounds like you're backlinking this site or something, it looks kinda templateish. Latest steam discussion was back in 2017. Uhhhh? |
|
|
|
This database is actually a goldmine for people who know how to exploit it correctly. Imagine having access to 3.1 million email addresses from people who will sign up for any and every dollar they can get. I reckon a good portion of them will click on whatever you feed them. God, the world (either the real world or the digital world) is not a safe place to live in as long as evil and greedy people still exist. I can confirm that my email was compromised with the CMC leaked. I've already changed the password and all but I can't throw it cause I still need to use it. However, I will be super extra cautious about emails coming and should warn myself not to open them recklessly. It's really frustrating but it's the fact that we should face in our daily life now.
Should've either used a throw-away when signing up for garbage or used an alias for your main email. Also how exactly is your email compromised? As long as you didn't reuse passwords and your password wasn't super-specific I doubt this will lead to anything. Also that first sentence, ironic? Nevertheless, email addresses are already being actively sold on hacker forums. And the most "bored" hackers may be interested in turning on their brute force for password collection. And as a result, the further fate of the hacked mail can be completely unhappy.
If you used the same password for your email and CMC account and the password is in a common wordlist to compare the hashes to, else i wouldn't worry too much about that particular issue. Spam is probably going to be your main groove. |
|
|
|
-snip- Did you check the segwit addresses? I checked the balance on the private key (the one with the smallest amount), 0 BTC, address never used. Then I checked it based on it's legacy public address, again 0 BTC. I haven't checked the segwit address because I have no way to get the segwit public wallet from a private key. To get the legacy public wallet from the private key I used the old brainwallet javascript web site. Know of any javascript sites that work offline to calculate the segwit address from the private key? Check this library maybe? |
|
|
|
Ok so basically we download the sigs from https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-22.0/SHA256SUMS.ascthen the hashes from... https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-22.0/SHA256SUMSbtw, this is indeed kinda hidden for now it seems, couldn't find it anywhere, not on github, not on bitcoincore.org, though perhaps I did not search hard enough on github.. then? --verify SHA256SUMS.asc SHA256SUMS and shasum your individual release and recheck obviously. Now this kinda assumes I have all the signers imported already. Obviously I don't and i'm not sure I care that much to import them all in a "decentralized - individual" manner (I think that's more or less the intention of this change?) I'm scrolling to see if I can verify Wladimir's signature with his old (11+) key, but no luck. Any easy way to check the signers and how much authority they hold as someone who isn't that involved? Edit: I guess the latter part of the question is still somewhat relevant though every individual will probably weigh this differently. I have a couple names + email addresses - easiest way for now seems to google them and add them individually..?I guess achow's key works. (EDIT: for those wondering: Imported using https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/contrib/builder-keys/keys.txt, which? corresponds with http://achow101.com/achow101.pgp, and thus? trustworthy) & gpg --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com --receive-keys 152812300785C96444D3334D17565732E08E5E41 |
|
|
|
Thats the reason I made the website in the first place, No KYC, small fee, no funny business. A place for skin buyers and investors alike to make skin transactions.
Right, so don't reinvent the wheel with some sort of escrow system between the buyer and seller. Just do what bitskins and csdeals does: let them deposit funds to the website and then if they buy a skin they pay with the funds they have on your website. No need for some sort of escrow transaction between the buyer and seller. You can do this pretty easily I think. Create a database object for each individual user with a couple objects. so when they log in to your site with their steamid they have a certain session key or something (not sure how that works with OpenID) that identifies them as steam user X. now from the site you (the steam user) makes api requests to your server when they visit **steamskins**.com/account/mybalance with a request that includes their session key / openID auth. that's just a DB query to get their latest balance. Now if they want to deposit and they don't already have a deposit address and they visit something like steamskins.com/account/deposit, they send an api req with their session key to you requesting an address. Just use bitcoin core's getnewaddress, link the address with their session ID / steam object, and if they deposit successfully update their balance. |
|
|
|
|
So you shouldn't want to escrow in that case you want to hold all the funds and just give an on-site balance and subtract when someone buys a skin or withdraws.
just use bitcoin core. If you can make a nice design and market it properly, you might have a somewhat useful product, given that Bitskins and CSDEALS both ask for KYC and have +5% fee rates.
|
|
|
|
What about their whole P2P saga ( https://p2p.binance.com/en) Site is blocked for me but I remember that this was supposed to become a thing undistinguishable from the "normal" binance, no? And not like current P2P exchanges where you have to manually take, but rather functioning like their normal trading engine, no?
I think this marks the end of the golden age of binance, though unlike Poloniex they seem very proactive about the whole situation. I actually doubt they will lose that many customers apart from some XMR swappers. People are already very accustomed to KYC anyway. Much more than they were when Bittrex and Poloniex went nuts anyway Oh what kind a circus this is, I think that 0.06 BTC daily withdrawal limit on Binance lasted only one week after they reduced it from 2 BTC.
When was this 0.06 limit? I've withdrawn more than that within a day over several accounts created this year in the last month or so. Never noticed it.. huh. |
|
|
|
1) If you buy BTC with USDT the fee will be subtracted from the BTC you bought i'm pretty sure. else they have to subtract it from outside of your original order, which I think would be much more messier than just subtracting it from the transacted amount. not sure how it works when you enable the 25% deduction on fees for using BNB, whether they subtract the BNB instead of the coin you're buying to pay for tx fees. 2) pretty sure this is the case, yes. 3) no, multiple decimal numbers can be used it's just that every coin has a certain precision: for example BTCUSDT has 0.XXXXXX -> precision of 6(?) so 0.000001 is the minimum but I think every amount inbetween is acceptable (0.678351) you can see more pairs here -> https://www.binance.com/en/trade-rule4) pretty sure that's correct, yes. you need to subtract 0.1% over that amount (or whatever the feerate for a maker/taker order is for you) if you want to swap it for USDT again. And when you want to withdraw it, you will pay an additional withdrawal fee of X $ 5) I think it's probably to prevent people from putting too much strain on their APIs. you can select a three-month window though. Or.. use an api though that's a bit more difficult. |
|
|
|
Pretty sure the buy order is with fees included...SNIP
Thanks for that explanation. Alright. What's up with the 999.86250 when I bought 1000 worth? And it's always like that. It means you did not buy 1000$ worth - you bought 999.86250$ worth due to the number of decimals allowed in the order of the altcoin (precision) (682.5 instead of 682.5555) |
|
|
|
Pretty sure the buy order is with fees included (so after it is filled X will be subtracted) and it is rounded to the native unit of the currency you're buying (and not the stablecoin you're using) so 682.5 instead of 682.503434039 or something. 681.8175 should be the remainder after 0.1% taker fees, however, if you use BNB you get an additional 25% off, and the fees are taken in BNB and not the coin you're buying? Not sure how that works given that I haven't used binance in a while.
Did you buy this coin before? Maybe you had some left that you couldn't sell? Also, if I'm selling 681.95400000 for 1.42565, shouldn't it be 972.2277201 (681.95400000×1.42565=972.2277201)? Why is it showing 972.150735? I think the precision is always N amount of decimals (depending on the coin) so you can't sell all of it, seems it's maxed to one decimal so .9 so (681.9 *1.42565) is correct. All that can't be sold anymore (too low amount) needs to be converted to BNB - https://www.binance.com/en/my/wallet/account/main/dustAfter you sell a maker fee is deducted over the amount sold before you get your stablecoin back. Check the order here https://www.binance.com/en/my/orders/exchange/tradeorder and see what fees you paid, you can easily calculate x percentage of Y with the info given there so <transaction fee> / 682.5 = 0.00100000NNNNN |
|
|
|
It could also be because said exchanges haven't designed an internal mechanism to adjust the fee of a user's transaction in the first place and just assigned a static constant for everybody regardless of network conditions.
There is absolutely no valid technical reason why binance would not be able to efficiently batch their transactions and charge their users a fair fee instead of the standard 25-30$ they are charging now given how much money they make, so it is really deliberate IMO, and very shameful. I suspect this is also the reason why they don't really want to implement lightning deposits/withdrawals... They make wayyy too much money off of deposits and withdrawals, so they rather attract the least attention possible to make people oblivious to the fact that they're actually completely getting ripped off. Now if they started an offensive implementing lightning and THEN charging users 20-30$ withdrawal fees with no apparent reason.. now that would probably cause some backlash. I'm almost certain that it is done for more profits and to a certain extent, helping the exchange to offset the costs of moving the funds within their own addresses as well.
Right now the average for 1 block is what, ~10 vbyte per sat? They're still charging 21$ per withdrawal, so their fees really aren't dynamic at all. 50000 satoshis, let's say 588 WU, though they batch transactions so really it should be roughly a quarter for an individual withdrawal, gives us 340 sats per vbyte. That's absolutely ridiculous given the current fees, even to confirm in 1 block. |
|
|
|
|
My two cents: the forum is dying - and perhaps that's deserved / inevitable.
The kind of discussion this forum was build for is no longer desired by the "mainstream" "consumer" of forums, nor was it ever, probably.
eg. there's (was) little to no groupthink (or an enormous amount, depends on how you view it), although the introduction of the merit system changed that a lot for the worse IMO, a lot of esoteric discussions about technical details etc...
Add to that a terrible UI, terrible average poster + shitcoin campaigns and you get an inevitable deflation once said campaigns stop and end up with nothing of value apart from some very technical discussion no ordinary user will understand.
Of course, when you have a devteam that's literally just scamming instead of improving the forum that's not helping either.
So yes, bitcointalk is losing her users, and it is totally deserved. Over the span of ten years nothing has been done to improve accessibility, useability, or its reputation. Instead, bitcointalk was just "first".
I guess we see what that has lead to, but don't get me wrong,
I think it is inevitable that a lot of users have switched to forums/social media such as reddit either because their opinion is better represented there, the discussions are better, or because it is simply much more accessible in such a way that bitcointalk never could have competed with.
So what's still so special about bitcointalk IMO?
- It was "first" blabla.
- You can "make money" posting. > Make money promoting morally dubious products such as bitcoin m***** or complete scamcoins, mostly.
User activity grows exponentially on the way up when there's the opportunity to spam shitcoins for moola - and declines exponentially when interest cools down in crypto. Seems pretty inevitable.
I mean, no one should forget where most of the popularity for this forum has come from for the last couple of years: a self-reinforcing hype of idiots constantly promoting rugpulls, shady casinos, or other shady financial products to each other. There's nothing necessarily wrong with that, but it's just bound to lose steam at some point until the next "framework" (what crypto is to the internet, kinda) to play these games in comes around, and new suckers are able to be drawned in.
Also seriously, I get an ad for "Elon Coin" by a DT1/DT2 member called lightlord? Wow. seems like the forum is extra desperate for cash these days promoting really obvious false grassroot rugpulls.
|
|
|
|
Why is this the only place I can find any discussion about this topic? Absolutely ridiculous. I found your thread through google  after much digging through all these streamer crypto sponsorships. I must say it was hidden pretty well. I'm guessing they bring too much money to the people on the forum for anyone to be honest about what kind of a shady practice this really is. If I had more affiliation with the section I'd definitely consider tagging them, but who am I, really? Perhaps i'm also out of touch with the standard business practices in this space, but from a (relative) outsider looking in, this just seems so weird. I don't think this is too much controversial because I saw different streamers getting support from their sponsors like the gambling platforms what are the reason? Because it's part of their marketing strategies that gives the viewers another hype experience like the player losses a lot but made a comeback so this becomes a good image too. It's not a fake bet because at the same time they have a contract and this is part of their advertisement. It's a different part of the player who uses his or her own money because at the same time still, a gamble is a gamble.
- the influencer has no actual (or very little) skin in the game. They are not betting with their own money no matter how you try to spin it. It's just one of the market strategies of online gambling due to high competition arises. A sad but it's true that we used to rely on the reviews of those who experienced playing or gambling on the certain sites and we didn't also recognize which of those comments are true and which one are the fake paid reviews. And we can't blame the fake paid reviewers because they are also need that cash/payment that they can get with using their name and dignity to testify a false information.
- most of these influencers are millionaires, they definitely do not have any financial urgency to promote any of these (sometimes) morally dubious products to their audiences. The rest of your statement is gibberish and not understandable at all. On one hand this could definitely pass as a scam, on the other it could be just one marketing tactic that works well. I do not know exactly how many gambling sites and casinos do this trick, but this is fairly common in auctions and events like that. Now it is up to the player whether they awill let their basic instincts overtake their critical judgement and let themselves get finessed by these sites, but personally, I do not indulge myself in leaderboard contests as I am not a high-roller myself.
If a streamer does not use special software to distort the results of the game and the game itself in the casino that he demonstrates, then I do not see any analogy with paid comments, which are deliberately deceiving. The fact that the casino gives him money for the game and he does not risk anything does not matter.
Ah, but it does matter if the streamer continously gets his account topped up by the site administrator until he wins big - that's just deceiving practices. People do really have that kind of hate when an advertiser do make use of money owned by the house itself or simply they know that it isnt theirs for them to spent on.I dont know
why people had bad impressions when it comes to that where the thing matter most is about the user experience and the possible chances that you can possibly hit when you
do play on a certain platform.People cant just really moved on if those funds are their own or been sponsored.What matter most is the fairness of the site and
the user interface and experience towards it and they should really be focusing on this one rather than on personal opinions.
And being fair and honest with their customers isn't part of the user experience? nor does it contribute to the overall perception of the fairness of the casino? (it does..) Yes, even if the game is completely virtual (for fake money from the casino), then the audience in any case can evaluate the casino interface and other parameters important for them (we will assume that the house edge is approximately the same everywhere and is known in advance). I do not know what one can be angry with in such a situation and where there can be deception.
You are already being deceived and thus you conclude that there could be no other possible way in which they are also deceiving you? How about they rig the odds of streamers as well? Wouldn't that matter either? Most of the comments in this thread are a special kind of mental gymnastics. I get it, they're just getting their "bag" too (I can't say I haven't done the same), still - for me personally i feel like you'd have to be absolutely mentally challenged to play on any of these (un)licensed casinos at this point. |
|
|
|
|
Any information on when bitcoin core will release support for schnorr signatures? Interested in playing around with it on testnet, but there don't seem to be any real implementations available/enabled yet? (Not regtest!)
|
|
|
|
Hi!
Does anyone here know about any Shiba Inu casinos and/or sports betting sites?
Yeah, it's called binance.com |
|
|
|
There is no monetary gain from using any of this wallets, I hear some people are complaining about Blockchain.com wallet and I see no reason of using web wallet like this.
If their website shuts down or if you lose their login password you can potentially lose all your coins.
Uhh, something something sneed seed? |
|
|
|
Yes. You can get notified by your telegram accounts and/or you can also get notified in your forum inbox. You have to subscribe the custom bot. Let me find the link and update. Checkout this project by LoyceV- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5331343.0That seems like a lot of work. In so many other forum's software there is just a little notification that shows up that you have been quoted. Can't the forum owner activate that? Hahaha, good one. No. I don't get how this is at all an acceptable solution.. sure given the means to work with, it's quite elegant, but come on, a telegram bot for something as trivial as notifications? This should have been a base functionality years ago and the fact that it still isn't is nothing short of embarrassing. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
