Was haltet ihr von COSS? Mit gerade einmal $16m Marketcap finde ich die für eine Börse recht niedrig bewertet.

4% from total tokens issued will be distributed in the Bounty Program – up to 4.000.000 LHCoin_b (LHCoin_b=LHCoin=$0.1)

Bitcointalk name: Scheede
Social media link: https://twitter.com/CryptoLino/with_replies
Follower: 1165

Task & links:

Tweets: 27
RTs & Likes: 94
proof of work: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2368249.msg27004813#msg27004813

Do we know anything about when they will get their API ready? Did team make any announcement related to that?

Dear all.
First of all on this very last day of 2017 I want to wish you all a very happy new year.
It has been a turbulent year for all of us, both in the market in general but also for coss as a company.

Secondly and with regrets I would like to apologies to all our users as we now see based on the ongoing testing, that we will not be able to go live with the new UI in 2017.
On behalf of the dev team, the UI team and us here at COSS HQ, we are very sorry for this. We started testing 3 days before Christmas, but to many issues appeared while connecting the UI to the current engine, and with the amount of bugs discovered it makes no sense to rush it just to keep a deadline. We need to make sure the new version is stabile and functional before we go live.
I will come with a new update on January 2nd, and while waiting for that, I wish you all a prosperous 2018.

Again, we are truly sorry for the delay and any inconvenience caused.

2 aus meiner Top 3. Erwähnt einer noch den dritten Coin, spendiere ich der Person eine Pizza und Bier  

habt ihr auch die level2 verification abgeschlossen?

Danke für deine kompetente Hilfe....

Was ist denn so toll an Peculium?
Die Videos sagen überhaupt nichts aus, einfach mal ein paar Buzzwords rausgeblasen, AI, Machine Learning, bla bla, Savings Management, worum geht es denn überhaupt?
Es wird überhaupt nichts erklärt?
Ein ordentliches Whitepaper gibt's auch nicht?

Cracking RSA
Alice sends the same message m encrypted using the RSA algorithm to three recipients with different moduli n1,n2,n3 all coprime to each other but using the same exponent e=3. Eve recovers the three ciphertext values c1,c2,c3 and knows the public keys (n,e=3) of all the recipients. Can Eve recover the message without factoring the moduli?

Yes. Eve uses Gauss's algorithm above to find a solution x, in the range 0 ≤ x < n1n2n3, to the three simultaneous congruences

x ≡ c1 (mod n1)
x ≡ c2 (mod n2)
x ≡ c3 (mod n3)
We know from the Chinese Remainder Theorem that m3 < n1n2n3, so it follows that x = m3 and so m can be recovered by simply computing the integer cube root of x. Note that the cube root does not involve any modular arithmetic and so is straightforward to compute (well, as straightforward as computing any cube root is).

Example
There are three recipients with public keys (87,3), (115,3) and (187,3). That is, we have e=3 and

n1=29x3=87, n2=23x5=115, n3=17x11=187
(although the factorisation would neither be public nor feasibly computable for large n's used in practice)

Alice encrypts the message m=10 using RSA to all three, as follows,

c1 = 103 mod 87 = 43; c2 = 103 mod 115 = 80; c3 = 103 mod 187 = 65
and these three ciphertext values c1, c2, c3 are intercepted by Eve, who also knows the public values (ni, e). She then uses Gauss's algorithm as follows

N = n1n2n3 = 87 x 115 x 187 = 1870935
N1 = N/n1 = 115x187 = 21505; d1 = 21505-1 (mod 87) = 49
N2 = N/n2 = 87x187 = 16269; d2 = 16269-1 (mod 115) = 49
N3 = N/n3 = 87x115 = 10005; d3 = 10005-1 (mod 187) = 2
x ≡ c1N1d1 + c2N2d2 + c3N3d3 (mod N)
x = (43.21505.49) + (80.16269.49) + (65.10005.2) = 110386165 ≡ 1000 (mod 1870935)
So m is the cube root of 1000; that is, m = 10, as required. Eve did not need to factor the moduli to find the message.

> bd_modinv 21505 87
21505^-1 mod 87 = 49
> bd_modinv 16269 115
16269^-1 mod 115 = 49
> bd_modinv 10005 187
10005^-1 mod 187 = 2

Comment: In practice with RSA we would be looking at much larger moduli in the order of 1000 or 2000 bits (i.e. numbers about 300 to 600 decimal digits long, probably too big for your pocket calcuator), but the same principles apply. You would need to use a computer package that does large integer arithmetic ... It is most likely that any three moduli in practice will be coprime, so the method is likely to be successful.

A. Di Porto, Impresa collettiva e schiavo ‘manager’ in Roma antica (II sec. a.C. – II sec. d.C.) (1984), 386 (emphasizing
that the most distinctive feature of this format was the possibility to organize both individual and collective limitedliability
enterprises by means of the peculium.). A. Di Porto, ‘Il diritto commerciale romano. Una ‘zona d’ombra’ nella
storiografia romanistica e nelle riflessioni storico-comparative dei commercialisti’, in S. Romano (ed.), Nozione,
formazione e interpretazione del diritto dall’età romana alle esperienze moderne. Ricerche dedicate al prof. F. Gallo
(1997), vol. 3, 421-422 (emphasizing that the fundamental elements of the organizational modes of businesses through the
use of slaves are independent of the fact that the slave and the peculium were co-owned. In fact, co-ownership only added
a layer of complexity to the business structure without affecting its characteristics in terms of liability and governance).
Lawson, The Roman Law Reader, 134-141 (emphasizing the level of complexity that slave-run businesses could reach).

Slave-run businesses operated within a legal framework based on the ius civile but enriched by innovations produced within the formulary system. Both the slave and his peculium, (including subsequent acquisitions) remained property of the masters. In addition, under the ius civile, contracts entered into by slaves could not produce negative effects for their masters. This situation changed from the second century BC, in a period of economic expansion, with the recognition of praetorian remedies to creditors of the slave. The underlying principle was that masters should internalize both the profits (commoda) and the losses (incommoda) deriving from their slaves’ business activities. The praetorian remedies—later identified with the name of actions adiecticiae
qualitatis—extended the liability of the master for transactions by his slaves, making the master’s liability increase in accordance with his involvement in the businesses. The praetorian remedies de facto made the contracts concluded by a slave enforceable against his master(s), under certain conditions. This development crucially improved the willingness of third parties to rely on the slaves’ commitments to repay debts and honor the obligations contracted and, in turn, made it easier for masters to delegate economic activities to their slaves. Moreover, although in a radically different way, this format exhibited some characteristics that are common in modern business entities.

Furthermore, the use of slaves (as opposed to free individuals) as business managers could mitigate the governance problems arising between owners and management, while the possibility for the slave-manager to purchase slaves of his own allowed for a hierarchical structure
with different levels of management. Against this background, we explain why slave-run businesses involved limited numbers of individuals and limited capital.

Several other texts offer examples of (hidden) actions by the slave that could, absent legal correctors, negatively affect his master: disregard for the master’s instructions or misuse of funds. Concerning the first issue, in D.15.1.37.1 (Iul. 12 dig.) Julian considered the case of a slave who, having been permitted to buy an underslave for eight aurei with his master’s money, disregarded his master’s instructions and bought a more expensive underslave. The slave’s purchase could in theory expose the master to additional liability toward the vendor, corresponding to the different amount due. (In this case, the fragment states that this additional liability should be imputed to the business assets (peculium) rather than to the owner’s personal assets (ratio dominica). Cf. D.15.1.4 pr. (Pomp. 7 ad Sab.).)

Finally, from D.15.1.17 (Ulp. 29 ad ed.) results that creditors of the slave could seize assets pertaining to the peculium of the underslaves of the said slave, but, in contrast, creditors of an underslave could not seize assets pertaining to the slave’s peculium (beyond the underslave’s peculium).

Hi there,

is there any way to find out more about my referrals?

It´s just displayed that there are 3:



but not if one of them have been any active...

Bin schon seit 2013 dabei aber naja erste ICO für mich , da zahlt man noch Lehrgeld 

OK.Thx 
Hatte mich vor paar tagen schon angemeldet.
Schade ist das man nur 25% der Ico Summe  in den ersten Smart Contract stecken kann.
Ist mir ers bischen spät aufgefallen,aber vielleicht kaufe ich noch ein paar.

Reicht also für den PCL Telegram Bounty sich nur beim Ofiiziellen Telegram Channel anzumelden?

in the beginning was such a large amount of news in e-sport, and now silence and no invitations to tournaments. this is very bad.