Not directly. But using a off-chain micropayment channel could reduce the number of small transactions needed.
It would be good to move faucets and gambling onto a sidechain.  Many faucets already use "off chain TX" by e.g. enforcing a certain wallet like xapo. Transfers between xapo wallets do not happen on chain, but within their database. Similarly casinos, the vast majority of them requires you to deposit first and while you play you only play on their database until you withdraw your funds. |
|
|
|
Do you have the file they send you via mail? How complex is the password and how much of it do you remember? Brute force vs. their web interface is not feasible. |
|
|
|
Its donations for some of the coding that I do. Yes, the donations are small but they add up. Where can I find a wallet that consolidates the inputs into 1 output?
Its not about the wallet, but the state of the network. You can try it with a low fee, but it will need time. You can try it together with larger or older inputs to give it higher priority. |
|
|
|
Brilliant, thanks. From what you write it sounds like its limited to address though and would not work with individual inputs, correct?
This is not correct. If you have 3 transactions sent to a particular address, and you want to spend a very particular input, then you right click on the address that you want to send "from", click on ' send from', electrum will take you to the " send" tab, right click on the input that you do not wish to spend and click remove, and repeat as necessary (note: you can select multiple inputs to remove at one time if you wish). One thing to note is that electrum will not spend inputs that it is not necessary to spend. For example, 18JqsJ9g4ybvxRHCLZAMgK1oUNGTon7g45 currently has two inputs, both of .9 btc....if I wanted to send .3 to address 1shorena... then electrum would create a transaction that spends one of the .9 btc inputs and sends .3 to 1shorena... and .6 to a change address (assuming 0 tx fee is paid). If I wanted to spend both inputs "in" the above address while sending .3 to 1shorena.., then I could create a transaction that sends .3 to 1shorena... and 1.5 to another address in my electrum wallet. Great, thanks. I will have a closer look at it the next time I have some funds on my electrum wallet. |
|
|
|
Is it posible to run a full node in pi? I need a external usb drive.
Computing power wise and power wise, raspberry pi is feasible.
It is for now, but its 512 RAM is very small and its CPU is very slow, so validating the blockchain alone takes several weeks. |
|
|
|
So I've read through the thread, and the discussion of the ban reasoning. It's been mentioned that users can be banned for consecutive posting with a paid signature, but not without a paid signature. Can we have any confirmation from a staff member that this is the case? If this is the case, why wouldn't this rule apply to all users regardless of if they're wearing a paid signature or not? Consecutive posts like Mitchell posted as examples seem to clog up discussions on the forum, and it's so easy to put all of them into a single post.
Signature or not the rules are the same, but if you have to judge the reason why someone does what they do its more likely that the reason will be "for sig payments" if they have a paid signature. IIRC doog (probably never had a paid sig) was warned not to post like this as well. |
|
|
|
|
@Seb_Ju sorry didnt fully read your entire last message, but you can change your signature to state that you are temp banned and that you should be contacted via e.g. an email address for the escrow. IIRC thats the way marco did it and it did not break the rules nor did it prolong the ban.
|
|
|
|
You need to wait for a confirmation.
If you will not be received a confirmation, you will receive Bitcoin wallet back after a while.
That's what happened to me with blockchain.
It has 881 confirmations, no reason to get that old thread up again. |
|
|
|
Now that there are quite less number of escrows, I believe Cyrus might be willing to offer global escrows(instead of the local-only escrows that he does ATM). Also, wasn't Shorena offering escrows too(no thread made about it though)?
If someone asks whether I can escrow I usually say yes, Due to a recent PM I got from someone I consider opening a multi sig escrow. Its mainly a time/priority issue currently. |
|
|
|
|
Sure a dumb fat pipe is always a solution, it is not always possible though.
|
|
|
|
Adresse ist: 1NAVjQQ5gFVwGDEd4QWxe7VJpw2X77Qff5
Wallet: Electrum 2.5.4
Klick mal auf das Icon unten rechts in der Ecke, mach das Häkchen bei "auto-connect" weg und such einen anderen Server aus. Wenn das nicht hilft, Häkchen wieder setzen, Electrum beenden und nochmal starten. Wenn das nicht hilft, eine andere Wallet Datei öffnen (wenn du keine andere hast, einfach eine neu erstellen), Electrum schließen, öffnen und die ursprüngliche Wallet Datei wieder öffnen. Manchmal muss man leider ein bisschen tricksen bis Electrum wirklich auf dem aktuellen Stand ist. |
|
|
|
I gave the trust rating on both accounts as u both have stated several times on here that he is the same person.
As to the risk statement, I my self may not have had any risk or problem per say. But every user who took part in his program did take the risk of loosing their funds, regardless of escrow or not.
You risked not a penny, hence your risk amount is 0. Thb, it has been often discussed, that escrows should even not leave positive trust at all, when acting in their role. The point of using escrow that you do not have to trust the seller/other party. And you understand, why it's not ok to get 2 independent trust ratings from 2 accounts being held by the same person over one single action? We trusted him and still do, using an escrow for these types of programs are the status qou on our forum. User's did take the risk of loosing funds by being involved, they could have lost out on their bonus pay on top of their return. I also def understand how you guys feel on trust, I feel the same as you guys. That's why i try to work with so many ppl on our forum to ensure and help reduce risk for our user's. That said we do not publicly and non stop flog our members for their mistakes. Thats why i added trust to both accounts to help show to you guys there is good in him. Whether u guys believe me or feel we took lil risk, I have at least got ur attention and u have seen some good in him.... quoted for reference. |
|
|
|
I heard there are around 500k active accounts now on Bitcointalk.
Anybody know roughly how many of these are Legendary?
And what does one have to do to get a legit one-off name and rank? Kinda like Satoshi but better. Thx!
Cheers!
A forum search[1] for "legendary" by position (and no other boxes checked) returns 18 pages with 30 each and a 19th with 26 so 566 in total. [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=mlist;sa=searchthe staff and VIP/donator users don't get listed there though. @Vlad2Vlad you can't get a unique rank. but can set a custom title for yourself if you're VIP (not sure but maybe donator too). edit: actually I'm not even sure if you can become VIP/Donator anymore. someone should try it.  Sure, wana sponsor me? AFAIK its still possible, but there have been no large donations for years now. |
|
|
|
Welche der Ziel-Adressen ist denn Deine?
...und was benutzt Du als Wallet software/service? |
|
|
|
I heard there are around 500k active accounts now on Bitcointalk.
Anybody know roughly how many of these are Legendary?
And what does one have to do to get a legit one-off name and rank? Kinda like Satoshi but better. Thx!
Cheers!
A forum search[1] for "legendary" by position (and no other boxes checked) returns 18 pages with 30 each and a 19th with 26 so 566 in total. [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=mlist;sa=search |
|
|
|
We have casino scripts and we would like to make clear that our script our safe. I think positive trust is kind of moving this forum.
So you're looking for someone to check and verify your code, right? Having positive trust doesn't mean someone has the necessary coding skills to perform that task. You should probably look for a (trusted) developer instead of some "tester with positive trust". I agree with Lutpin, what language are the scripts written in? You might get someone to respond if they know what they will be looking at. |
|
|
|
It might be more reasonable if 10 or 20 accounts were used instead of 100, and if a large enough of a company with a large marketing budget came along, then it might be feasible to get all of them in custom deals that pay enough.
Its certainly easier with less acounts, I guess the easiest with a single one, but that might be just me. One reason why you might want to use multiple accounts would be to diversify who is paying you to advertise. For example if you only have one site you advertise for, and that site turns out to be a scam then you will lose your advertising income until you can find/arrange another deal. If you have 5 accounts that each advertise a different site then if one of them turns out to be a scam, then you can advertise from the other 4 accounts until you are able to arrange another deal on the 5th That is a factor indeed, but it would greatly complicate posting. Again, that might be only me, but I would find it extremely difficult to separate the accounts and to avoid collisions (in terms of same topics). The only way I can think off to make this cleanly is to give each account a specific set of sections they are active in. -snip- There were actually two accounts who would have pages long discussions in the politics section across multiple threads that made the politics section essentially impossible to post in (if you wanted to make useful/constructive posts). sana8410 and umair127 used to frequently talk to each-other but are the same person ( source). I believe that BadBear had left negative trust for all of zolace's alts, but for some reason seems to have removed the negatives. From their activity level they look banned to me. I would say overall that the chances of pulling this off are low, however I would not say that it is "impossible" as most other people have posted in this thread.
Its certainly not impossible, but its also not the "easy 6k" OP tried to make it. It would be a full time job and not a reliable one. I would even go so far and say that a well designed bot might go unnoticed earning off of a signature here. Who knows, maybe in 10 years bots are regular users here earning their coins to pay for their rent (server) and food (electricity bill). If the goal is to make $6k per month, then BTC trading at ~800 (as it was for much of early 2014) would make it much easier because you would need to make 1/2 as many posts (rates were roughly the same as they are now). If you wanted to make 280 posts per day, then you would likely need to use a decent amount of automation. You could potentially use some kind of bot that uses AI to post on your behalf, however I understand that kind of software is likely going to be much more expensive then the expected earnings from a signature deal. I could counter that it might be feasible for someone that is still at the university but heavily interested in AI, but they would likely have more fulfilling oportunities (maybe not in terms of money) than teaching neural networks to post on bitcointalk. I think this is an inherent problem. Those that have no other option will very likely never reach your quality of posting while those that have other options have little reason to spam. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
