Wow, if you are right Forgotten, that would put my mind at rest knowing I at least have a backup without all the hassle, like I said I use strong passwords so would be willing to take the risk. Oops idiot moment again, I take it both devices will keep ( stay in exact time ) considering that I move around with my mobile  You might want to confirm that... it's possible it could be device based. When I carried an iPhone and iPad - I could hit the 'generate' button at the same time and both would generate a different code. Again - I don't use QR codes so it could work totally different... but with non QR code token generating apps (that's what they are - I use iToken now) after entering my password for the site, I just have to add the code provided by iToken. |
|
|
|
Personally I prefer emailed, SMS, or phone call 2FA, but that's only because I'm not familiar with the QR code method.
What if your email account was hacked? SMS/phone call also isn't the most secure way to do it. Phone company can see those, greedy employee's or hackers who've hacked your phone company can get them. In simple, the QR code method works like this. The website generates a big long random string of letters. They make it into a QR code so you don't have to type it in. You scan it, your phone saves the random letters. When you open the app on your phone, your phone gets the current date and time and the random string and hashes it. Hashing it basically jumbles it up in a way that can't be easily reversed back, the end result is a six digit code. You enter that in the website, and the website uses the same random string that they gave you before and the current date + time and does the same thing, hashes it. It should calculate the same six digit code. If the code you gave them matches the same one they calculated it'll let you in, if they don't it won't. This way is MUCH more secure than SMS/email. You do not need internet access on your phone to do this, all your phone needs is the random letters and the right time (has to be almost to the second accurate or else you'll have a different code). Someone wanting to hack your account needs the random letters and they are long and random, it'll take a LONG LONG time to guess them like a bitcoin private key. I wonder if it would work to have it set up on a phone and iPad at the same time, would the 30 seconds code sequence be the same?
I would take the security risk as I use strong passwords that are kept off line.
The other guy was wrong. This will work fine so long as both iPad and phone have the exact same time set. I'm not saying it's the most secure way, no. Nothing is the most secure. However, a hacker would need to know both my password and have access to my cell, iPad and/or email to access the accounts I use 2FA for. I never use any type of auto log on feature like what I think you're describing? I know how the random code generator works for 2FA - I use it on my iPad, but it's conjunction with my account password (if that makes sense). But isn't that method tied to a specific device anyway? Again I don't use QR codes so my 2FA apps are always tied to my device... IDK...maybe it seems that the a new QR code should be generated for each log in? I'd feel much 'safer' with a random QR codes for each log in. What if I'm sitting at work (I'd never do this), and have the QR code on my screen - with the cameras on today's code, someone 10 feet behind could take a pic of screen and capture my code. That's a little extreme, but what if I lose my phone with the QR pic saved as a pic? Rhetorical question of course. |
|
|
|
Why the magic number of $70?
Watch out for the government man, not sure where you're located but you don't want to go publicizing you make that much.
LMAO! This was too funny - totally needed that laugh! |
|
|
|
I wonder if it would work to have it set up on a phone and iPad at the same time, would the 30 seconds code sequence be the same? I would take the security risk as I use strong passwords that are kept off line. Shit damn I have to wait for 360 seconds between posts. I don't have a stutter  Nope, they'll be different. |
|
|
|
Looks to me that it's 2FA you know nothing about.
Wow that was helpful, tell me something I don't know You know... my response had absolutely nothing to do with you or your question - that's my problem. I was where you are before, so I know better. So let's try this again.... Personally I prefer emailed, SMS, or phone call 2FA, but that's only because I'm not familiar with the QR code method. Okay I confess, I prefer to carry a clam shell phone, but I do have my iPad mini but still. If push comes to shove, one would think you'd be able to request that the exchange send the coins back to the originating address. In that situation, it's less likely that you're a person attempting to gain access to someone else's exchange account. It probably won't work, but a shot nonetheless. Many thanks for the reply, that would be a fair request to have it returned to sending address. About 18 months ago my iPhone crashed on me and had to be replaced. I hope it doesn't happen to my new one. Seems to me no system is perfect. well, I feel better that you accepted my apology (yeah, that was my sorry ass version, lol), but at least you own an iTrash device... this coming from someone who owns many iDevices btw. If you worry about data your phone again... take a screenshot of your QR code (press home & power button together), then back that shit up to iCloud. |
|
|
|
While I'm still a lil t'd I had issues compiling OGminer (couldn't get it to work when first launch)... I regret not revisiting the issue, truly I do. This coin is one of the few out there that's actually 'innovative'. But I think majsta has a point. Exchanges would lost a lot if they don't keep the money makers (pumps/dumps) coming through the door. Besides... are they prepared to list a new market anyways? And wtf is a Dobbscoin?! You didn't follow the rules.
1. Create new account here, not sharing any personal info, using WE as a phrase so everyone could think that you have army of ppl behind this project
2. Create shiny OP with schematics diagrams where you add graphic who describes anon transactions who does not make any sense and don't have any real purpose and who is not backed in any way in code
3. You didn't created hidden block who has at least 20% of total coins that can be mined
4. You don't have whitepaper describing nonsense that coins will be used to save the world
5. You didn't used algorithm created by someone else
6. You are not in the group who decide what is interesting and what not
7. You didn't wanted to enter into POS fraud
8. You didn't wanted to pay exchange representatives for coin listings
9. You didn't wanted to cheat on the voting page
10. You had impression that someone will recognize your hard work
There you have it 10 reasons and I could write 10 more...
|
|
|
|
Looks to me that it's 2FA you know nothing about.
Wow that was helpful, tell me something I don't know You know... my response had absolutely nothing to do with you or your question - that's my problem. I was where you are before, so I know better. So let's try this again.... Personally I prefer emailed, SMS, or phone call 2FA, but that's only because I'm not familiar with the QR code method. Okay I confess, I prefer to carry a clam shell phone, but I do have my iPad mini but still. If push comes to shove, one would think you'd be able to request that the exchange send the coins back to the originating address. In that situation, it's less likely that you're a person attempting to gain access to someone else's exchange account. It probably won't work, but a shot nonetheless. |
|
|
|
|
Looks to me that it's 2FA you know nothing about.
|
|
|
|
|
Damn - what's up with that font? Seems like everybody posting in that thread like huge colorful font. Wait a sec... all of those aren't you, are they OP?
|
|
|
|
|
OP, this claim has no subsistence - none.
I skimmed Teodor87's previous posts and didn't see any posts - aside from that ridiculous offer to buy 16BTC from a 1 poster noob - where he's trying to scam people with Paypal. If you look though similar posts with noobs trying to sell a 1000 coins, you'll see people throw jokes around all the time - nothing new. Now am I saying Teodor87 wouldn't take advantage of a noob, no. But that one comment isn't enough ground to call label him a scammer (although it's possible that he is - it's just not apparent based on the info you provided). Could false info be misleading... ummm - it's false info, hello! But that's Teodor87's ignorance for not understanding Paypal's rules.
It looks to me that you're just angry for not not receiving your bounty of $100 - that's all I see! Damn - I've made comments that I bet somebody this and bet somebody that - that doesn't mean I'm actually serious. Did he say that just to say it and you took him up? Did you even confirm whether or not he was serious? No - you just assumed that he was.
|
|
|
|
All jokes aside. I'm straight but would suck you off for 100btc
And we're supposed to believe this given your name? That you're straight, I mean |
|
|
|
|
I agree with freedom of speech... It's presenting opinion as fact that I don't agree with. I didn't have to even read the entire article to know that this author needs to increase his crypto currency knowledge base a bit. So I clicked on link and flicked my iPad screen... Stopped here: "Bitcoin doesn’t have very much to offer ordinary users right now." We want mainstream adoption, not people to think this is so complicated that it's reserved for the geeks! That's so circa 2011/12. But I hope you get what I'm saying.
|
|
|
|
|
Remind me to steer away from that site for info because they evidently know this scene - nOT! The last thing we need is a panic... People thinking that bitcoin has competition, because it doesn't, it never did. LTC and FTC were created to compliment BTC, not to compete. Altcoins worth 10 times less, collectively, than bitcoins is not competing with bitcoin... against each other, sure. But no altcoin should have so much confidence that it considers itself competition -at least none out there now can.
OP, is this article written by you? If not, please remove this garbage... It's confusing the noobs and those already confused. If this was written by you, after removing this thread please educate your a little bit more before making a claim like this.
|
|
|
|
spam
noun
1. irrelevant or inappropriate messages sent on the Internet to a large number of recipients. Above is the official definition of the term "spam". I contest that when a pool operator posts one-time that they have created a pool so that miners can mine a particular coin, that post is both highly relevant and appropriate to the coin thread. As a miner, this is perhaps the move relevant information that can be posted in a thread, and is often my sole purpose for visiting a coin thread. Therefore, this act is not advertising "spam" and should be permitted! Who's with me? Everyone apart from the mods I think Not everyone... I don't care for the sheer number of spam, but I do think the vagueness and the way this rule is being implemented should be rethought. Yes, just knowing an exchange listed a coin is informative.., and definitely there's a need to know which pools supports the coin; beneficial, but there are pros and cons either way. Relevant and appropriate are both subjective terms... What's appropriate for one might not be for another. I consider all the weekly ads I get from store spam.. Okay, maybe not the one I get from Dillard's, but that's my point. Point is, the mods feel they're looking out for the best interest of the community as a whole. Do I agree something should be done to lower the number of spam, sure. Do I think this is the best way, nope. Here's a thought for the mods ... Maybe the forum can add a new type if member... For those who are advertising their service. Or even provide an option (like a check mark when you post) so that marketing posts can be easily identified by everyone. Of course this will only be effective if users are allowed to filter posts (don't display solicitation posts for example). Oh, also gotta throw a few supporting rules in there... Anybody caught/reported not labeling their post as solicitation gets 3 strikes, or some shit like that. Anyway, I'm sure you guys get the idea. Yes, this requires a little work to implement at first, but in the long run it pacifies both sides and it's sustainable. Lot less work for the mods if you ask me. But whatever. |
|
|
|
If this turns out to be a joke (don't see a reason to believe it's not), it's rather cruel. I skimmed through a few posts and it's evident that some people are truly taking this seriously, spilling their hearts out. That's not fair to them. While I personally have never gotten and don't expect to get anything for free, some people do. No judgement whatsoever, but I'll be damned if I'd fool myself into thinking it's finally going to happen now that I've reached the old lady age of 30. It's downhill from here, lol. But on a more serious note... As a female, you learn quick that nothing's really for free. Off my soap box, now I want to play  if I had 100btc... Half would be kept in BTC, the other converted into fiat to pay off debt. Okay.... Maybe I might splurge a little on a much needed vacation, but that's pretty much it. |
|
|
|
It's still unreasonable snce you don't minimise the restriction to only permit such posts. The posts in your picture are clearly only intended to advertise a pool. They use glossy colors, bold letters, urls, and bold formatting. They're there only to draw attention and end up taking space in posts and end up making discussion harder. A one line post to update the status of a pool is nothing like that. Just a damn regular post. I can't get why pool OPs would be banned for such a post. Right. Which is why we'll now begin to see the coin devs posting it for them as MineP.it pointed out. Not saying coin devs taking bribes... but if a pool op offered a few coins to have them post in the thread... is that fair? Whatever angle you look at it from it's bullshit really. If a user from MineP.it came on instead of me and posted that we had a pool running - would they be banned too? What if someone posted that xxxxxxpool was offline? Would that result in a banning? It's all so vague and tbh I'm nervous posting anything at all now incase I'm banned for saying something that could be construed as an advertisement. You asking me? Hell if I know! But how could they not be under this rule... one can just easily say it's paid advertising, an alt account, whatever. So there's really no way to distinguish between a genuine post versus a paid advert. |
|
|
|
|
We've all done a few things here and there that don't sit too well with us.
Care to share?
|
|
|
|
It's still unreasonable snce you don't minimise the restriction to only permit such posts. The posts in your picture are clearly only intended to advertise a pool. They use glossy colors, bold letters, urls, and bold formatting. They're there only to draw attention and end up taking space in posts and end up making discussion harder. A one line post to update the status of a pool is nothing like that. Just a damn regular post. I can't get why pool OPs would be banned for such a post. Right. Which is why we'll now begin to see the coin devs posting it for them as MineP.it pointed out. Not saying coin devs taking bribes... but if a pool op offered a few coins to have them post in the thread... is that fair? |
|
|
|
Can I show an example of where this system has a negative effect? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702380.0The dev has added pools to the list here in an order they feel is appropriate. To anybody visiting the thread for the first time all they will get to see is that list of pools in the OP. Firstly, there are no details about any of the pools - what fees they charge, any unique qualities, any special benefits miners may want to take advantage of etc etc Secondly, I've been watching the list as pools were being added over time. The order of the list seems to be based on nothing but the dev's idea of which he feels are the best/largest/most important pools. We were running before Dedicated and were added 4th in the list. Dedicated open a pool and are added right at the top. This is fine, it's the dev's coin and he can organize his post how he sees fit. But it's just not a fair summary for miners. Most likely 90% of people will just click the first one in the list and not bother with the rest - even though they may get a better deal mining in one of the other pools. And wait, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702380.msg8178047#msg8178047Is that not "advertising spam"?? Or is it OK for the dev to post it? Looks like you're number 5 on the list now. While I like the idea of less spam, this could be handled with more precise. This new policy is just going to allow the monopolization of pools as is. No doubt coin devs are going to take full advantage of this - instead of listing coins for free on the announcement... they'll be a nice hefty fee associated with it. How can smaller pools or p2pool compete? |
|
|
|
|
Nice!
Totally enjoyed the laugh!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
