The address which the burned coins were sent to is mentioned in this deed bundle: http://deeds.bitcoin-assets.com/bundle-371897.txtThe first deed says: In the Kamigata area, they have a sort of tiered lunchbox they
use for a single day when flower viewing. Upon returning, they
throw them away, trampling them underfoot.
The end is important in all things and the second says: CONVICTED OF ACTIONS:
- BOUNDLESS DISTRACTION
- TROLLING SOME FACTION
CE VERGE P'UN LEGAL INFRACTION!!
Time to leave this network.
My brief apology is dwarfed by massive gratitude
towards you, and you, and most of all... YOU TOO
If you have cared far to read this, you've earnd
the trinity (the best things in life... so phree
To reach me again, you doubtless know how
some email on keyservers, github, and cetrums
The road to help
is 1PavedWithGodAndSomeTeensionXudq5X Both deeds are signed with PGP key ID 7CDA03F9. When I verify the signature, I see: gpg: Signature made Fri 28 Aug 2015 05:50:16 AM PDT using RSA key ID 7CDA03F9 gpg: Good signature from "Adlai Chandrasekhar < adlai.chandrasekhar@gmail.com>" This was shortly after adlai had a falling-out with MP: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=25-08-2015#1252200, in which adlai dares agree that assbot is too spammy http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=26-08-2015#1252289, in which MP asks him why he thinks he belongs in the channel http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=27-08-2015#1253642, in which MP unpersons him So it looks like the 'odd' coinjoin was adlai's parting message to #bitcoin-assets? How about publishing some (weekly/monthly) "traded" volume statistics at Joinmarket in the (near) future?
That would be good to spread the word and to get more attention (and liquidity) to this project too.
There's a project for eventually doing that https://github.com/adlai/cjhuntAlternatively me and others who run market makers could say how many CoinJoins they participated in last week. Edit: I'll start, in the past 7 days my bot participated in 23 transactions with 1.94btc in total passing through my coinjoin outputs. In the past 7 days my bot participated in 77 transactions for a total of 48.66 BTC. |
|
|
|
Regarding the controversial comments, this was SuperClam's request from last week. Issues concerning Just-Dice, JD rain bots, JD trivia bots, etc. should be taken to the Just-Dice thread. Issues concerning ClamChecker should be taken to the ClamChecker thread. Also, a bit of respect in the thread here, please. Thanks!  I think if one party makes a negative comment about the other party, a good way for the other party to respond while satisfying this request is to post a reply saying something like "my response to this is in X thread" along with a link to the post with the response. This might move the argument out of this thread and also point people to the other relevant threads. We moved the discussion to the ClamChecker thread, but then, days later, all my posts were deleted by BAC. Somewhat ironically the first post he deleted was me saying how it was cool that he allowed discussion on his thread rather than simply deleting opposing viewpoints. These are the 4 deleted posts. I don't think any of them are offtopic, inaccurate, or rude: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4[...]
There would also need to be ways to upvote and downvote, e.g., by sending clams to different addresses.
Do you think there would be much interest in this? I noticed many people were pushing for decentralised forums in the past couple of months due to the Bitcoin XT controversy.
Issue #221 talks about dynamic blocksizes and fees, and I think the idea is to remove the limit on CLAMspeech size, to allow the blockchain to be used to store arbitrary data, for a price. I don't know how much interest there would be in a decentralised forum. The ad-funded centralised forum concept seems to be what everyone is comfortable using. It's hard to get people to switch, even from one centralised web forum to another. I cannot figure out how to get the Bootstap.dat file I downloaded to be seen by Clamclient. I placed it in the same file folder as Wallet.dat...But the client didnt react to it
First off, you need to stop and restart the client before it will notice the bootstrap.dat file. Secondly, take a look at this screenshot. See the "importing blocks" in the lower left corner? That means the client is processing the bootstrap.dat file. Do you see that? Thirdly, you wrote "Bootstrap.dat". The filename should be all lowercase. I don't know if that actually matters in all operating systems, but it does in Linux. If it isn't being found, try renaming it to be all lowercase then restarting the client. Finally, I just updated the bootstrap.dat file. See this post for the link. If you use the torrent link you should be able to update your existing bootstrap.dat file to the latest version without having to redownload the whole thing. I hope that helps. |
|
|
|
Like i said i'm late..  Can you post results/ nicknames of heroes of the match  or at least comment how did it go? The tourmanent ist just over now! The first place earned 0.1 BTC (Chatroom-Nickname:0x1d) The second 0.05 BTC (Chatroom-Nickname: IEatzU) and the third one got 0.025 BTC (Chatroom-Nickname: AnonymousBee) The Chopcoin Team thanks everyone who joined this great game and we are looking foward to the next tournament  Thank you all for making this evening so special - we had goosebumps when we saw how many players just joined our tournament! You might want to take a lesson from how poker sites run tournaments: you'll often see tournaments advertised with "guarantees". Like it'll be a $1 buy-in with a guaranteed price pool of $25. That way if more than 25 people join, the site isn't out of pocket at all, because the prize pool is entirely funded by the entrance fees. The guarantee makes it very worth while for the first few players to join, which seems to be the part you're having trouble with - often your games are completely empty. The art is in picking the size of the guarantee. You don't want too many games to be costing you money, which happens if the guarantee is set too high. And you don't want to be running empty games, which happens if it is set too low. |
|
|
|
No have changed your statement now earlier you said millions made from poker and now telling considerable.
You seem confused. The question was "Can gambling be profitable in the long term?" The answer is "Yes, if you are good enough that you have a positive expectation and have a big enough bankroll to withstand the variance it will be". You need both. If you don't have a positive expectation you will lose if you play long enough, and if you don't have a big enough bankroll you'll go bust during one of the downswings. Ways of having a positive expectation include counting cards when playing blackjack, playing games with progressive pots only when the pot is big enough to make it worthwhile, taking advantage of promotions, etc. |
|
|
|
ehh.. I wish to be with you, but probably i will be late for this game from work.. Have fun and good luck everyone! I won't be able to play either. |
|
|
|
We start the tournament @ UTC 8 PM
Countdown to 8pm UTC:  |
|
|
|
words
Offering 0.005 BTC (less than the price of 1 CLAM) for an entire dig address (4.6 CLAMS) is fucking people over no matter how you try and spin it. We've been asked nicely by SuperClam not to argue about Bay's "service" here. I know it's hard to resist responding, but doing so doesn't seem to ever achieve anything anyway, so I think it's best if we leave the topic alone. People have already decided for themselves whether an 81% fee is too much or not. I don't think we are going to change anyone's mind at this point. |
|
|
|
the investor is literally getting their deposit back from their own money over a period of 20 days. So where do you get scam from this?
What happens on day 21? Once you've given the investor all their money back, where does the next day's money come from? That's where we get "scam" from. In order for this not to be a scam you need to be generating 4 to 6% in real profits each day, and you can't. I left you some trust feedback. I will remove it if you can show any evidence that you aren't running a Ponzi scheme. This. At 4%/day, you'd turn $100 into $1m in 236 days. In less than 60 days past that, you'd be at $10m. End of year 1? $158,538,777. Let's try with $1k and 6%. Now after: 236d: 884,867,689 296d: 29,189,741,779 365d: 1,626,802,969,124 You would be a TRILLIONAIRE on day 357, less than a year after starting. And that's just with $1k. Something's not adding up. Do you mind if I use your post to answer his enquiry of me?  |
|
|
|
the investor is literally getting their deposit back from their own money over a period of 20 days. So where do you get scam from this?
What happens on day 21? Once you've given the investor all their money back, where does the next day's money come from? That's where we get "scam" from. In order for this not to be a scam you need to be generating 4 to 6% in real profits each day, and you can't. I left you some trust feedback. I will remove it if you can show any evidence that you aren't running a Ponzi scheme. |
|
|
|
We will add in the upcoming days that people can try and test the faucet playground without the need of registration. Just if they want to earn the coins they have to register an account. I also added the info how many players win on faucet playground.
I realise you have a finite amount of funds to burn on the faucet, but I think it would be better (now that the site has quite a lot of players) if you made the top 10 places all win something rather than just the top 5. Two ways of doing this without it costing you anything extra: 1. reduce the top 5 payouts to fund the bottom 5 2. make the free games last twice or 3 times as long - I think that would be a good idea anyway. They are too short at the moment. Or you could have the game duration be random between 10 and 30 minutes, with the prize pool being proportional to the length. So you're still burning through the same amount of faucet funding per minute, but there's a little extra variety for the players. Edit: also, how about saving my settings? I log in, but it doesn't remember that I like the dark background, show mass, no skins, etc. |
|
|
|
A week later he asks to withdraw his whole balance so you sell the altcoins to get him his BTC. Due to exchange fees, slippage, and altcoin volatility you only get 90 BTC when you sell, so you send him his remaining 90 BTC.
What do you then show on the site? I suspect it's this:
invested 10 BTC
paid out: 90 BTC
I'm sure you've noticed but I'd like to point out that he's paying out the original investment value. Obviously in your example he's screwed immediately but it works more like this: Investor A puts in 50 BTC. Investor B puts in 50 BTC. Investor A decides to withdraw. Despite "exchange fees, slippage, and altcoin volatility" Leroy pays out the full 50 BTC. Investor B is left with less than 50 BTC but the site shows 50 invested, 50 paid out. Investor C puts in another 50 BTC. Investor B decides to withdraw. Despite "exchange fees, slippage, and altcoin volatility" Leroy pays out the full 50 BTC. Investor C is left with "who the fuck knows how much" but the site shows 50 invested, 100 paid out. ... So it's a "pass the bag" game. The last bagholder(s) will get the dubious honor of paying for it all. Oh, so in my example the sole 100 BTC investor is able to withdraw 100 BTC even though the investment tanked? Where does the 'missing' (*) 10 BTC come from in that instance? (*) note, by 'missing' I don't mean 'stolen', obviously. I apologise in advance for any butthurt generated by my careless use of the word, and hope the impact of any such butthurt has been minimised by this disclaimer. |
|
|
|
Can anybody please point me to a list of casinos that accept CLAM type bankroll-investments.
I would like to invest some of my personal CLAM's in them, thank you!
I only know of two (as does http://dicesites.com/ ) Just-Dice.com (10% commission, 11880k wagered, 764k bankroll) bitdice.me (20% commission, 292k wagered, 10k bankroll) There's also bustaclam.com and fortunejack.com which take CLAM, but I didn't hear about them taking bankroll-investments. Apologies if I missed anyone. |
|
|
|
Leroy, Hello Investors,
We have made some changes in our OKCash wallet, for those of you watching and have all the information we used to have 23 addresses in that wallet. The new V3 update has us merging our addresses now, so when i am done we will have only 3 addresses instead of 23. This was done to make it easier for me to structure the blocks every day. If you have any questions or want the exact addresses to be able to watch us staking the coins please PM me here or send an email to payments(at)stakeminers.com.
How about having one address per wallet and publishing it so that investors can track the performance of their investment? We also had another situation arise this week, a member registered with a disposable email, and I guess he could not email from that email address. Your email is the only thing you can use to make important changes to your account.
That's silly. It is easy to fake your sending address. Let people set up a username and password, or PGP key, or - well, anything other than plain text email! StakeMiners would not be a very secure investment at all.
Heaven forfend! There is information in your account area that shows how many BTC are invested with us and how much we have paid out, Those values you see on the site for BTC invested and BTC paid out are not calculated by me but by the database. We are not in any way giving any misleading information, the BTC invested you see is how much BTC is invested with us, the BTC paid out is how many BTC we have paid out to date. Plain and simple as that.
Here's the problem: Suppose you only have one investor. Suppose he invests 100 BTC. You use it to buy altcoins to stake. On the site you show: invested: 100 BTC paid out: 0 BTC A week later he asks to withdraw his whole balance so you sell the altcoins to get him his BTC. Due to exchange fees, slippage, and altcoin volatility you only get 90 BTC when you sell, so you send him his remaining 90 BTC. What do you then show on the site? I suspect it's this: invested 10 BTC paid out: 90 BTC The "invested" number makes it look like you're holding 10 BTC of value still, but in fact you're holding nothing. The 10 BTC is actually a loss taken by your investor, and is now in the pockets of the exchange and its smarter traders. This, I think, is what people are saying is "misleading". The "invested" number includes losses due to exchange fees, slippage, and altcoin price volatility. It would be less misleading if you showed a profit/loss amount. In this case: invested: 0 BTC profit: -10 BTC That would be less misleading, but would look bad. Lastly, the topic of this thread is a little offputting, as is the style adopted by your PR representative. He seems to draw attention to all the least attractive parts of your investment scheme with large fonts and gaudy colours. I suggest switching back to your main thread and firing this guy. |
|
|
|
CLAMS is a cryptocurrency with unique distribution model – they sent 3.1 million CLAMs to random BTC/LTC/DOGE wallets that had any amount before May 2014.
That first sentence contains around 7 errors: * I don't think the method is unique. I think it has been copied (unsuccessfully) since. * Who is "they"? You use the pronoun without first introducing anyone. * CLAMs were sent to each address, not each wallet. * 4.6 CLAMs were sent to each address, not 1. * 3.2 million addresses received CLAMs, not 3.1. * The distribution wasn't random. All BTC, DOGE, LTC addresses with more than a tiny balance received the 4.6 CLAM distribution. * It wasn't before May 2014 that the snapshot was taken. It was the 12th of May 2014. The rest of the article isn't much better. It could really use a spellcheck. It's interesting to see that you linked to the clamchecker site with its excessive fees for digging and didn't mention that just-dice.com offers the same service for free. I guess that's the power of affiliate links - maybe BayAreaCoins is onto something after all if bloggers like yourself are willing to fuck over their audience in exchange for a tiny referral fee. |
|
|
|
I removed the links in the OP post to previous "STABLE" versions due to the improvements in connectivity and specific bug fixes in more recent versions.
The last line of the OP links to my bootstrap.dat, but doesn't mention the partial bootstrap files. Maybe it's better to link to my bootstrap post which I keep updated, which links to the partials, and which gives the checksum of the bootstrap file too, so people can check that it downloaded correctly. |
|
|
|
 "On my unlocked thread, I will splash my wad on Leroy's face whenever the fuck I please. Then, I will stick it in Fodor's ass because he's a fuckin' joke anyway." Dubious plan. For best results try the opposite order; leave any wad splashing 'til last. |
|
|
|
Just updated the addnode list in the OP post - however, it should be mentioned that this should not be necessary any longer. It should not be necessary if they use the latest release, but will be if they use the versions linked from this thread's OP: CLAMs v1.4.15 Test BUILD
Download and Release Notes
CLAMs v. 1.4.13 STABLE
The latest release is always available here: https://github.com/nochowderforyou/clams/releasesalthough there's no OS/X binary yet it seems. |
|
|
|
i will make post on my blog about CLAM in around 2-3 days. lets see if u guys like it If you would like me to proofread it before you publish it, post it here and I'll correct it for you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
