Why?

Legendary requires 775. So theoretically with 775-14=761 you'd already have a chance.

Note that the activity has not to be divisible by 14. The activity is min(posts, time*14).
If your theoretical activity would be higher (e.g. 1000+), but you'd have 761 posts, your activity would be 761.



By the way, it is still slightly off



Take me (activity 938) for example, my probability is roughly 1/7 (14.3 %). But based on your formula, i get:

luck numerator = 13
luck denominator = 18
luck = 1/6


The correct formula is:


Quite sad that it took us multiple posts and (way too much) thinking to find that (extremely easy) formula  


Edit: to be more precise regarding the script:

Excuse me?

I don't install (potentially shady) extensions. Especially not at work.

Why should i install such an extension if i can do this with a one-liner on the command line?
I don't need pointy-clicky for that.

I am faster at typing one line than checking the reputation of a pointless extension while still having doubts with it being closed source.




I have read the thread, came across 'can not archive' and posted a screenshot.
This definitely means all of them are my buddies.

And in 10 minutes we go to lunch together and start making fun of you.  

---

I am still interested in this:

It doesn't take more than one day to get your digital copies of the photos after being shot.

Your archive-links are broken, you have http://http:// each time 



Fixed for you:

Was war das denn für ein Drama mit Lauda? Das ist irgendwie an mir vorbeigegangen.

Konnte auf die schnelle auch keinen ordentlichen Thread dazu finden. Hat jemand eine Quelle für mich ?

This can't be the case.
The activity where i rank up is a random number between 938 and  (including) 1030.

Activity increases by 14 each cycle. This means there are 7 more cycles in which i could get legendary.
The chance for me to get legendary in the next cycle therefore is 1/7 = 14%. The next cycle the chance would be 1/6 = 17%.


Based on your statement i should be legendary in 3 cycles.
But that can not be said if there are 7 more cycles to come.

I'd have a 50% chance to get an uprank in the next '3.5' cycles.


What your formula does, is to calculate the chance of getting legendary within 775 and X activity (in the quoted calculation above: between 775 and 938).

Scammer because of rescinding from a trade? 




Where did i admit that? 




Please.. please tell me.. what did i steal?

Oh... now i understand.
I wanted to buy alcohol or guns and rescinded from it. Then afterwards i posted publicly that this specific alcohol/gun is low quality / from country X / made of plastic / basically any non-confidential information.

I see.. i stole... the possibility from the seller to scam people with worthless goods.


How many more threads do you want with this topic ?  Aren't 3 already enough? Do we need 4 ?

Das bezieht sich nicht auf ChipMixer allgemein (oder deren Konzept mit 'chips' a.k.a private keys).
Jede Seite (Ob mixer oder nicht) kann so übernommen werden.

Daher ein bisschen lächerlich, dass anzubringen als follow-up auf "wer garantiert dir das da keiner reinguckt"   




An sich, dankt Authentifizierung, so nicht möglich.




Das geht auch nur, wenn du eine CA als vertrauenswürdig im Betriebssystem hinterlegst.
Firmen machen das.. aber welcher Nutzer zuhause macht das denn bitte? Da müsste man schon selten dämlich sein..

Damit würde man quasi sagen: "Authentifiziere dich, aber mir ist eigentlich egal mit wem ich spreche".




Aber auf jeden Fall.. 




Nein, musst du auch nicht wenn du nicht davon ausgehst dass vertrauenswürdige CA's kompromittiert wurden.
Und wenn du davon ausgehst, dann musst du das bei jeder Website machen.

Bevor ein mixer damit 'angegriffen' wird, wird es die Banken und PayPal etc. treffen. Da ist einfach mehr Geld zu holen.




Irrelevantes 'Argument'. Was hat das denn mit Standard Mixer vs ChipMixer bzw. Mixer im allgemeinen zu tun? Garnichts.




Das unterscheidet sich auch nicht von anderen Mixern.
Wenn du deine Coins an einen Mixer schickst und in 12 Stunden Coins zurückbekommst, können die in dieser Zeit ebenfalls gestohlen werden.. damit würdest du auch leer ausgehen.

Wie gesagt.. wenn du die private keys nach X stunden (mit X = Zeit die es bei Mixer B braucht bis man die Coins bekommt) 'einlöst', bist du genauso dran mit der Sicherheit diesbezüglich.




Ach.. das sollte ein Argument sein?

Ich hatte das ignoriert, weil ich angenommen hatte, dass du zumindest im Ansatz verstehst wie Bitcoin funktioniert. Dem ist wohl nicht so.

Ich versuche es dir mal so einfach und anschaulich wie möglich zu erklären.. dann solltest sogar du das verstehen können:


2 "schmutzige" UTXOs (A und B; jeweils 1 BTC)
1 "sauberer" UTXO (C; 1 BTC)

Transaktion:


Aus diesen 3 UTXO's werden 5 neue.

Du kannst ja mal versuchen zu bestimmen welche UTXO's jetzt die "sauberen" und "schmutzigen" sind..

Aber verbring nicht zu viel Zeit damit.. denn das geht nicht.


Wenn ich einen "schmutzigen" und einen "sauberen" 10€-Schein in 10 2€-Münzen wechsle, dann kannst du auch nicht sagen "Diese 5 sind schmutzig und diese 5 sind sauber"..



I denke du solltest deine Argumentationslogik etwas überarbeiten.
Wenn du für oder gegen etwas argumentierst, dann bleib dabei und komm nicht mit Sachen an, die damit garnichts zu tun haben. Das macht dann nämlich keinen Sinn.

Zudem solltest du dir eher mal einiges an Wissen anlesen, bevor du hier versuchst absoluten Müll als "Fakten" darzustellen..
Offensichtlich verfügst du ja nicht mal über grundlegendes Wissen der ITSec und Bitcoins UTXO-model.

Generally it is recommended to use apt-get if you already using that for package management.

Mixing installation with apt-get and dpkg makes it harder later on to uninstall packages again. Or at least more work.

But since this machine is used for offline storage only, that shouldn't be a problem at all.



You can simply install it using dpkg or apt-get.
You don't need to remove/uninstall anything before doing so.

Yes, those 2 different messages have the same source.
Just one has been removed and the other not (don't know why though).

This number says how probable it is to get legendary within 775 and X activity.
But it does not say how probable it is to get an rank up with the next update, which would be a bit more useful i think.

But regardless of that, nice work.

Not a direct archive, but converted the page to a pdf, then converted to an image, uploaded to imgur and archived that image from imgur: https://archive.fo/CzRHT/84241584cdd79cc20b9f2efcfca35ca6ddf2f9d6.png

I guess better than nothing.

I left a rating for "pinoycash" and "caramelisedbanknote".

There is no valid proof for buying/selling actions from "Shinpako09".

So, SaltySpitoon..

you left a negative trust rating to "pikacha15" for "attempting to sell fake items".


Selling fake items is not illegal. And you did financial damage to him by interfering into his business.

Based on your logic, you are a scammer and should deserve a flag.

No, it doesn't.

The financial damage has to occur because of breaking an agreement.

This is clearly not the case.

What is the agreement in your eyes? Please enlighten me.


Additionally, sharing publicly available information (usernames) is no financial damage. And that's all i did.

 

Oh quicksy.. how many threads do you want to spam with this?


For once and all, the flag says:

I don't want to start arguing whether we had an agreement or not.
I also don't want to start arguing again whether the account seller got damage.

I have answered that in the 2 other threads already.


But.. IF i violated an agreement and IF the account seller got monetary damage because i tagged his accounts as untrustworthy:

The 'damage' has not been done because of violation.

Based on this (which is enough already), and the fact that 'damage' and 'violation of agreement' can't bee seen as such.. the flag absolutely is inappropriate.

You don't say 

But based on the fact that most accounts offered by the shady person (a.k.a. account seller) only have english posts and this account additionally is active in the german sub, it is very well imaginable that the account got hacked.

We can't be absolutely sure. But if the IP log shows a login from a completely different IP / country while trying to sell this account, it is very probable that it got hacked.
Therefore i will change my neg trust rating to a neutral one if a trustworthy member of this forum confirms the IP log shown.

The reason was to inform the public about untrustworthy accounts.

Their value was close to nothing. If the owner didn't put any effort into an account and just bought it, the value of the account is close to nothing.
No decrease of value. And OP didn't lose any money.

By 'direct cause of your actions'.. what are you referring to? Publicly posting non-private information ? This does NOT fall under the category of 'breaking an agreement'
And this alone is enough to proof that the flag is inappropriate.




The reason was not to do any harm. It was to protect people from these accounts.




Addresses are confidential information.
Your username.. is not. No publicly viewable username counts to confidential information.

And again.. the goal was to protect others. No damage has been done. And especially not by 'breaking an agreement' (which again.. is required for a flag).




I never acknowledged the value. As you said.. i didn't plan to buy them.

To speak in your language:
I didn't 'crash the lamborghini'. What i did was rescinding from an 'agreement' and informed everyone about the color of the leather seats.
Just because pink leather is not very popular among people, this doesn't mean i did any damage.




Again, no. I shared non-confidential information.




Your definition of a scammer is way off 



I'd also like to remind you (SaltySpitoon) of the following:


1)


and

2)

Could you let any trusted member of the community log into your account to verify the IP log ?
Once done - and given that the IP log indeed shows a weird login from pakistan -  i will too remove my negative rating.

Not really.

Information which should be publicly available were made public. Nothing else has been done.

The account is still under possession of OP's friend and still has the same value (which is close to 0).
Just because OP's friend wanted to have an unrealistic high amount of money, this doesn't mean that he can't still demand that amount.




Why? Did i steal the account? No.
OP's friend (not OP) still has this account and still can sell it to anyone else.





Oh Quicksy.. please explain how backing out of the agreement (lets call it agreement, just for you) lead to damage.

Hint: You can't.. because it didn't.


Me making public that the accounts aren't trustworthy (information which everyone should have access to) didn't even lead to any damage.
OP can still sell his accounts for any amount he wishes.

But the public deserves to know which accounts are to be trusted and which not.


I know.. you, as an extremely shady and account farming person, try everything you can to protect account seller and farmer.

But your opinion is simply wrong.

And the quality of those posts...  



Google translate:

14 merits



Google translate:

18 merits

---

Google translate:

10 merits



Google translate:
And what is dishonest in crushing? split your pennies up to 100 wings and you will also guess and receive a reward, the whale will get more in any case and what was in the Indors or Jobe will not be enough, because projects are mostly collected close to the median

9 merits

---

Even tho google translator is bad as hell.. those posts are blatant spam