|
I have to ask for curiosity, dooglus, did you invent the clams? Or were you in on the making or planning or launching of clams? I'm just curious whether this is a project that you've been in from the getgo or if it's something that you stumbled across and took a liking to.
|
|
|
|
I generated a address that I am very fond of, 1Greekhut. I am working on getting a few more like 1Canary 1Sinker and 1Send. All case sensitive.
If you find a very beautiful or very weird one you should apply to the hall of fame: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=90982.0 |
|
|
|
Any update on when the html online client will be out ?
2-3 months. Hey there, what about a login to the website (won't that be necessary (eventually) for the html client?)? If you guys go ahead and allow the login then those of us who still haven't reclaimed out accounts can do so and also we can possibly see the trollbox and whoknows maybe someone will make a trivia robot (that was fun!) and cetera. |
|
|
|
Thanks Abdussamad! It looks like pybitcoin tools may have everything I'm looking for. I"ll check out pycoin as well! |
|
|
|
|
Just wanted to say that bitbaby and I played at a microstakes table for nearly an hour yesterday. It was fun but I was a little sad that no one else joined us (specially when there was a freeroll going on simultaneously so there were at least 9 or so people logged in). If you're there for the freeroll, double check the ring-games tab and consider sitting down for a little while. It helps the site and it will help us all in the long run if we get some good action going here.
|
|
|
|
New Primedice rainbot ...
Obvious virus is virus.Looks like the post got deleted from this thread. Hopefully everyone knows that you shouldn't be running untrusted code on your computer. Run programs that are open-source so that even if you can't read code you can trust a little bit in the fact that it is open so that others will have read it and checked it. Don't run Windows. If you have to run Windows, don't run your bitcoin wallet on the same computer. Those are my daily safty tips  On the topic of scripts and primedice. I've written some shell script using curl and sed and grep (and some perl) to do betting at primedice via the API. If anyone wants to look at those or ask me for tips about how to do that kind of thing, just PM me. |
|
|
|
|
Hi there,
I've been playing around with some exports of a bitcoin HD wallet and I have the seed used to kick things off. I was hoping to find an offline tool to generate the deterministic keychain from a given seed. Can anyone recommend such a tool (command line tools preferred!)?
|
|
|
|
What is the current best sig campaign for full member if average post is 100+ per week?
Prolly dadice campaign. |
|
|
|
Any reason for the self moderation?
To keep it clean from trolls. For the most part it will not be used. This was the reason why your post was deleted. You are a troll (and a scammer but that is irrelevant to this specific action). Do you seriously think that your past is not going to be looked into when you start to troll someone? Trolling someone is the quickest way to attract someone's attention, and it is probably not a good idea to troll someone who has a well known reputation of being able to sniff out scams when there is public evidence that you have scammed in the past. You really are a moron. Check it out, when no one else praises him he praises himself. I love it, "moron", "my well known reputation", etc. Sorry, but you claim in your thread that you don't post feedback for person reasons. But you falsified that statement by leaving me negative feedback for personal reasons and I pointed it out. I'm not into deletions by people who self-moderate, so I posted the comment here. As for trolling, I'm not sure how what you did to me could be characterized as anything else. I was around before you and I'll be around long after you're gone. Drama producing mudslingers aren't on default trust for long, I'll wager. |
|
|
|
>Also I have never used any account to support my own position.
You've left negative trust from at least 2 of your accounts to whateverhisnickis. If that's not supporting yourself with your alts, what is? As I mentioned previously in one of the other threads, the first negative was left by ACCTSeller was because of something I felt was untrustworthy (trying to significantly weaken the trust system and to make it significantly easier to scam as a result), and was appropriate that the community be warned, but was not appropriate for him to have a "warning:trade with extreme caution" tag. Once I found out that he had scammed, I left the more harsh negative rating from this account as anyone who has actually scammed (and not repaid what they stole) should have a "trade with extreme caution" tag. Actually there's a big difference between "having scammed" (not my case) and "having been accused of scamming" (which is my case, and yours as well). So I dunno if you've ever scammed, but I can see that although you've been accused, you don't have to wear a scammer tag. Cool. But of course everyone knows exactly why you went after me. You weren't happy with the fact that I argued with you and called you out for your temper. You made a promise that you were gonna get me banned from my signature campaign. And then went through with it. Everyone on here knows tha I don't trade and that the only reason for your feedback on me is that you have a personal agenda against me. If it wasn't the case, then you'd have to explain why you would have any interest at all in me, much less in what a known scammer said about me in the past. |
|
|
|
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. QuickSeller, you're definitely good and professional, no offense but you could try not to be agreesive, you probably couldn't just hit negative feedback to people who say something bad to you, I assume trust system is designed to prevent scammers.
I have never given negative trust to anyone for personal reasons. Except me! (let's see how long this post lasts  ) Although, to be fair, you did it after the 15th April 2015 when you wrote that post. |
|
|
|
Is rule 21 actually enforced? Very few people follow it, and the couple of times I have reported it, nothing seemed to be done. Is it worth reporting at all?
Yes it is. I always report them and they're handled eventually and I handle the ones I can (made by newbies), but I think there's a lack of Global Moderators and Marketplace mods that can handle them, not to mention they're probably not a top priority and deleting posts, especially many, takes longer than dealing with other reports etc. hillarious, what about the necro bumps here by Quickseler/ACCTSeller: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303613.msg11140169#msg11140169These bumps were part of a smear campaign to dig up potential dirt on me. Certainly this is not how people on Default Trust are supposed to be behaving? |
|
|
|
How the hell was the bitcoin eater address found? That thing would have taken a while to generate wouldnt it?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it the bitcoineater address wasn't found. It was created manually and only works because it fits the base 58 algorithm with the proper checksum at the end so you can send bitcoins to it. Is that why Btc cant be withdrawn from it? BTC can't be spent from it for the same reason they can't from any other address - no one has guessed a private key. I guarantee you there are quadrillions of private keys that correspond to that address (about 2^96). But good luck finding even one of them. ok I get it, the wallet exitsts but no-one has the private key cool I don't really think that's exactly right either. Basically look here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Technical_background_of_Bitcoin_addressesIn the section "how to create a bitcoin address" you'll notice that step 0 is "have an ECDSA key", but i ymagine that in step 1 you can start with a random number rather than a public key corresponding to a private key you know. You just go ahead and do the hashing and the checksums and you've invented a bitcoin eater address which doesn't have a corresponding private key known by anyone. It's not really true to say "the wallet exists" (wallets are software), but it is true that your address can't spend any bitcoins sent to it (because no one can sign transactions to spend them). |
|
|
|
It was pretty easy for me to tell when in near perfect synchrony QS disappeared from my sig-ad campaign, AS appeared and began trolling me, AS trolled me all night until he found an old accusation of Tradefortress, QS magically reappared and used it as a reason to get me kicked from the ad campaign---which was his stated goal (as ACCTSeller).
Are you starting to understand what "Default Trust" means? I know there some subtlety to your comment which I'm supposed to get. But I'm rather slow so I don't get it, can you spell it out for me? An enemy of the agenda of the Default Trust, is an enemy of the forum. Hmm, well, I don't know I'm an "enemy of the agenda of Default Trust". It seems to me that Default trust is a collection of people who probably don't have a very clear and collective "agenda". However, I am certainly against someone leading a mudslinging campaign against me for personal vendetta. The fact that that person is on default trust is certainly even more bothersome --- but I'm pretty confident that this is going to be resolved in a few days when Badbear is back in town and QS finally has to account for his actions. Of course the fact that there's a time-lapse here means that in a very real sense QS is costing me income that I would have earned though advertising. We'll see if he's interested in paying back the money his smear campaign is costing, I think that'd be right and fair but I'd be surprised if he goes for it. Since I'm not on default trust it won't matter to him that I wouldn't be removing the negative reputation unless he paid back the BTC he has cost me due to his actions. |
|
|
|
It was pretty easy for me to tell when in near perfect synchrony QS disappeared from my sig-ad campaign, AS appeared and began trolling me, AS trolled me all night until he found an old accusation of Tradefortress, QS magically reappared and used it as a reason to get me kicked from the ad campaign---which was his stated goal (as ACCTSeller).
Are you starting to understand what "Default Trust" means? I know there some subtlety to your comment which I'm supposed to get. But I'm rather slow so I don't get it, can you spell it out for me? |
|
|
|
Not sure what you're getting riled up about. I've defended you by pointing out that you haven't invented lying, cheating, or theft  You don't really think of yourself as the root of all evil, do you? I think you have implied that I was doing all of those things on here which I have not. Never in your life  I remember you asking me yesterday to prove that ACCTseller was your sock. And look, the very next day, with no effort from me whatsoever... *poof*! No more need for proof >I think it is being a little hypocritical if you are saying that it is bad that I have a "sock" account when you are yourself a shill account. The difference being I've made no claims at being someone who belongs on some cheesy trust list, of being honest, or even of being a decent human being. I'm using an alt account to prove, by example, of just how ridiculous and intrinsically flawed this sort of thing is. >Also I have never used any account to support my own position. You've left negative trust from at least 2 of your accounts to whateverhisnickis. If that's not supporting yourself with your alts, what is? @r3wt: ever since I've discovered right-click->search with Google, comments like yours have lost a certain ...what's the word i'm looking for? I'm suprised that you were able to identify Quickseller as an alt. Most people haven't noticed the pattern yet. btw, my comment was meant for someone else who may or may not be perusing this thread. It was pretty easy for me to tell when in near perfect synchrony QS disappeared from my sig-ad campaign, AS appeared and began trolling me, AS trolled me all night until he found an old accusation of Tradefortress, QS magically reappared and used it as a reason to get me kicked from the ad campaign---which was his stated goal (as ACCTSeller). |
|
|
|
For clients, We will need to wait 2-3 months, but Android is now under development, with Mac soon to start, and HTML 5 & Linux planned.
Android has the potential to really bring in a lot of new players that are already playing OFC on their phones. Instead of playing for free and then trusting your opponent to pay money later they'll be able to play for money right in the app. 2-3 months would make it close, but would be a bonus if it's ready while the WSOP is still goin. Yup, android will be enough to get me back in the game. |
|
|
|
How can we solicit mods or admins to comment on the ideas in the OP here?
Try not starting so many threads in this section & locking them when they stop going your way. Between that and your prodigious posting, my guess is most have simply put you on ignore Thanks TerminatorXL. Of course I think you're talking about the two threads dealing with Quickseller's personal attack on me. I locked that thread (and the ancient one that he had necro-bumped) not because "they weren't going my way" but because endless flamewars are not equivalent to fruitfull discussion. In that situation, it's clear that QS/ACCTSeller is intransigent and that Badbear is the one who will have to adjudicate the matter when he returns. So I locked it to stop the mudslinging. It may be worth emphasizing to you that this thread was started before QS's smear campaign against me, so, while it seems surprisingly predictively timed, it's actually not related specifically to that attack campaign. @Salty, thanks for weighing in. I think you have to be right that mods are going to have a more direct line of communication with Theymos than we normal folks do. If you like suggestion (3), perhaps you could bring it up with him. I think it would be an improvement. |
|
|
|
Id like add my view on things, tspacepilot was so nice to unlock the thread for this. I cant say if the thread will be locked afterwards or not. That is not for me to decide.
Firstly I value Quicksellers input on things and I think the rating is not a violating or misuse of the DefaultTrust status. It is pretty clear that the Trust System does not follow much rules and it should also be very clear that it is more often than not based on opinions.
I was tempted to add my rating along with Quickseller, but I decided against this. Keep in mind that I might be biased on this as TF tried to blackmail me in the past (see the above post by quickseller regarding the dicebitco.in campaign), I tried to mitigate this by consulting several close friends IRL.
My main reason is that there is no solid proof. I read through all the old posts as well as the new posts and never was any solid evidence presented. As I said above that is not always how the trust system works, but in this case I think it should. Its been way over a year and I think multiple negative ratings are uncalled for. A single negative rating by quickseller can be countered by a few good trades. A single rating can also be discussed with a signature campaign manager. This gets harder to more negative ratings an account has accumulated and I dont see any reason to make it any harder as it already is.
Indeed I am going to relock it because I think that the discussion is getting to the point of going round-and-round and the real solution here is in badbear's hands, but being away, I have to wait. As you say, Shorena, there's no solid proof against me and what's more, I don't do trades and I don't cause trouble. This whole thing is motivated on Quickseller's personal anger against me. Perhaps from this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1018585.msg11034617#msg11034617Perhaps from elsewhere where I have disagreed with him. You can see that when I disagree with him he quickly switches over to "you are and idiot/don't know what you're talking about" or "you are just a spammer". He does this against me in multiple threads and now that he's admitted that ACCTseller is his alt the timeline of his vengence campaign against me is really clear. (perhaps relevant, in this thread he seem to be arguing just the opposite point https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=875272.msg10015541#msg10015541, proof that the guy is interested in being right and winning the argument at all costs, ie, can't admit when he's wrong). You are completely correct that trust system is unmoderated and QS can use it how he likes (see here for my ideas how how to have less drama over this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1031791.0). Nevertheless those on default trust don't stay on there for long if/when they start using their status as a way to take out personal grudges, begin flamewars, etc. In that spirit, I'm relocking this thread and awaiting the return of badbear or the removal of QS's smear, or both. |
|
|
|
|
How can we solicit mods or admins to comment on the ideas in the OP here? We've had some good discussion ourselves but it would be nice to find out what the bosses think.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
