I apologize if I am creating this topic in the incorrect forum, but I didn't know where else to ask this question. I figured bitcointalk.org would be the best place to ask this question, since most of you seem to value the security of your information. What is, in your opinion, the best Antivirus Protection or Antivirus Software for a Mac? Preferably for a reasonable price, free would be even better.
Thank you in advance.
I'd think probably recommend ClamXav too - it is free. It probably isn't needed, but if you are worried, it will do a good scan. LittleSnitch is a good tool too. (And I think this is the wrong forum). ;-) |
|
|
|
The concept of rounding transactions up and saving the money is not really new. My bank offers this service, but it never made sense to me.
Adding Bitcoin to that certainly makes it more interesting.
I agree. It will be interesting to see how much traction this gets. Each individual usage - e.g. this, tipping, remittances etc - may seem small (or some large) but all told they will add up. It would just be nice to see them adding up sooner vs later. :-) |
|
|
|
|
Use part of the block hash for the block at the end of the giveaway. Beforehand you'd say "this giveaway ends at block 352993" and block 352993's hash determines the winner based on the last 10 decimal digits of the hash.
E.g. you'd look at the block hash,
0000000000000000004ffa5650fc8148beb6f9f21bd2a2db115376ecbcb61f21 (this is in hex hash for block 351963)
And pick the winner based on the value of the hash.
So:
the last digits of that block hash are: cbcb61f21 which is 54,705,659,681 in decimal. Truncate it to 10 digits, so 4,705,659,681 would be the winner. No one can control the hash of the following block, hash distributions are believed to be random.
Do they have to pick it exactly? If not, then you'd say "closest number to X". Are they placing entries in a publicly provable space? E.g. on the blockchain?
|
|
|
|
|
Are you asking about Bitcoin core and the block chain or blockchain.info ?
If blockchain.info, this is the wrong section, if Bitcoin core, more details would be helpful.
|
|
|
|
and how do you spend them safely, witouth importing it(which in this case will result in a loss, because is pc is infected)? the problem is always one, having a safe machine in the first place, no matter what kind of wallet you have, they are all unsafe if your device is infected
I'm rebooting my PC right now. But if I keep whole file of a coin in %appdata%, there's no risk that the virus survive ? Should I just keep the wallet.dat ? your pc is infected mate, any folder is unsafe, you need to scan your system use malwarebyte + hitmanpro, then run an antivirus like avira or avast if you can't remove i would suggest a format/secure erase of your hard disk [/quote] Even virus scanners can miss malware. The only way to be sure you removed it is to reinstall. When you have more than a few coins, use cold storage. |
|
|
|
This is about an altcoin. And the article didn't have much substance. |
|
|
|
...
You're saying "it won't be possible" is like this:
...
I am saying nothing of the sort. There is a huge difference between the two. Look at the math and try to understand what it is saying. (And btw, Gates denies saying that). |
|
|
|
Probably because it looks like there has only been one block (maybe 2) since it was created. It has been nearly 45 minutes since the last block. |
|
|
|
I would have thought 10.6.8 is 64 bit already, looks like its good I stay away from Mac advice  10.6.8 is (was) both 32 bit and 64 bit. The main problem is that the Macbook2,1 was a late 2006/mid 2007 machine and so 2-3 years before 10.6 (Aug 2009) and so defaults to a 32 bit kernel. 10.6.8 was released in July 2011, so that was even later. I think that the machine isn't even capable of a 64 bit kernel (one generation too early) so while the OS can do it, the computer can't.  0.10.0 was only tested on 10.7+ with 64 bit. Given that (iirc) the kernel is only 32 bit, I think that was the issue with 0.10.0 on that machine. By the way, I think you can go to 10.7 on the Macbook2,1 (not that it would make a lot of difference). I think the steps he is trying - reinstalling bitcoin and trying to redownload the blockchain are a good start. |
|
|
|
I'm using here a Macbook 2,1, running 10.6.8 that cannot be updated any further.
The processor is a 2GHz Intel core duo from around 2007/8.
The memory, 2 GB 677 Mhz SDRAM.
Boot ROM Version: MB21.00A5.B07
Of the 120Gb HDD I have 21.5Gb remaining space.
This morning before the crash Bitcoin-Qt had another 36 weeks of the blockchain to verify.
I had tried previously to run .10 but it failed to open as now, so I went back through Time machine and managed to restart in .8, and it was running for 1-2 weeks 24-7, occasionally with a successful shut down and restart, with a DU scan in between.
I don't think you want to be running 0.10.0 then. The 64 bit vs 32 bit and not tested with 10.6.8 is sufficient reason to avoid it. I'd use the version you were using, 0.8.5. 2GB with VM should be okay. You could try re downloading a known good copy of 0.8.5 and see if that helps. If not it might come down to using the torrent, and then resyncing the whole thing. |
|
|
|
After seeing this , i really worry about my money !
Is there any command line that split my money between my wallet addresses ?
Example : i have 1000 BTCs and 100000 BTCs addresses in my wallet , I wanna SHARE my BTCs between 100000 addresses . how can i do by a command line or
something like that easily ?? And what am i must do for paying no fee for miners ?
I can make an application to move your coins like you want, it will be open source. You really shouldn't be worried tho. Inform me when you finish it . Thanks You should definitely not be worried, the odds are astronomical (as has been discussed ad nauseam). However, if you didn't want to use that many addresses, you could split them between, say, 10 addresses by hand. |
|
|
|
|
If you have a seg fault, it would make me ask a few questions:
1. How much RAM (memory) do you have?
2. How much space is left on the drive? (e.g. if you are running out of disk space, VM may not be working)
3. Is there a reason you are still running OS X 10.6.8? The latest release was summer 2011, so it is not getting security updates. Depending on which Mac you have, you might consider going to OS X 10.9.x (or even OS X 10.10).
4. I am pretty sure that Bitcoin 0.10.0 was only tested on OS X 10.7 through OS X 10.10, so that COULD be an issue.
5. Finally, which processor are you running? (or perhaps easier, which Mac "Model Identifier" in System info e.g. MacBook3,1 or Macbook 5,2 are you running?) I ask this because bitcoin 0.10.0 was also only tested on OS X with 64 bit processors, so that too could be an issue.
6. If for some reason you can't upgrade to OS X 10.9 or 10.10 and are really stuck at 10.6.8, that may change the suggestions.
|
|
|
|
I don't see how having 4.7 million means they're bankrupt but I doubt they'll be able to sustain operations based entirely on donations. That's their problem. We don't need them and their members seem to just serve their own interests as opposed to the greater good of bitcoin and everyone else.
$4.7 million was the end of 2013 and $5.2 million Jan 2014. January 2015, they had around $463k (according to their leaked docs). Their burn rate was around $150-$200k/month so far in 2015. It was a bad implementation of a bad idea from the start. |
|
|
|
Is this a real story? Yeah, he just put a different TWIST on the old tale. :-) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
