Non credo che pur conoscendo gli ip il discorso cambi molto, mi basta riavviare il router per avere un altro ip..
Ci sono tanti modi per cambiare IP, ma spesso i truffatori che troviamo qua sono per lo più ladri di polli, e non fanno tanto per proteggersi. Comunque si, non sarebbe una soluzione reale, ma potrebbe avere una sua utilità. |
|
|
|
Non sono presenti Indirizzi di Cryptomonete in CAT
Sono presenti Nickname (che ha fatto la richiesta di acquisto) e CHIAVE API PUBBLICA dell'exchange.
Direi che se quanto scritto qui e sopra è vero, l'argomento CAT è chiuso  Per quanto riguarda la privacy in generale, se ne può anche continuare a parlare, ma magari in un topic a parte. |
|
|
|
|
You didn't answer to my question.
Maybe you even don't know what it is Liquid, and then it even more funny when you claim that BIP101 is something that is pushing Bitcoin to be more like Ripple.
|
|
|
|
because this is their hidden agenda. To transform bitcoin to a new ripple system
Have you just read how does it works Liquid?  Some of you clearly live in fantasy world. |
|
|
|
Brian Armstrong (aka Coinbase) and 99% BTC media belongs to some morons called "the shit elite"(Coinbase, Bitstamp, BTC china, OKcoin, Ripple, Bitfinex = all these have the same shareholders).
Ripple lol. Ripple takes space over Bitcoin every time it (Bitcoin) doesn't offer a good result to his customers. How can you put it with them? |
|
|
|
yes we all agree to scale bitcoin but not in the way that bitcoinXT is propose. Bitcoinxt movement has a hidden agenda and is clear that they want to take control of the bitcoin core.
And why Bitcoinxt (or BIP101) should have an hidden agenda (can you explain which one?) and Blockstream doesn't? I saw the video, and he still talks about the Bitcoin Foundation, which it doesn't exist anymore currently. He say that it is good that all the powers are well distributed between all the parties, and that the users and devs are the ones which own more of it. Decentralize the devs is another good achievement  |
|
|
|
LOL, I'll wait to se how a miner can make a double spend cheaper my making just six blocks in a row (or more) over 1MB. Yeah, I'm the one that need to study, sure. |
|
|
|
It is just the same, the oldest advice ever on Bitcoin is to accept minimum 6 confirmations I give up. |
|
|
|
So it's the same problem that we add with all past forks It's better to not accept high value transactions during the forks, what a news! |
|
|
|
Any XT node would could be tricked into accepting a block ...
Again how much costs this attack? How much costs making a block bigger than 1 MB? Even if all miners will happily lying about making blocks bigger than 1 MB by changing the block-version-numbers, they need to make a real bigger block to succeed in some way to make a double spend, and it isn't cheaper at all! |
|
|
|
Right back at you; how can a network operate without miners? Miners can sell for cash (i.e. no need for exchanges), a network can't operate at all without miners. It's pretty obvious who has the upper hand here. They're the sole reason that the network is as strong and secure as it is today (hashrate).
It can't. The all argument started from some statements that someone/something was forcing miners and other to move to BIP101. This is just false and impossible, because it can't happen without the whole agreement all the main maintainers of the network (exchanges, payment processor, nodes and users) Miners will not move on something that doesn't accept their money, or they could just move/jump on another altcoin everyday already (which they obviously didn't) If it will happen, it will be because the whole market will want it, deal with it. |
|
|
|
Let me assure you that my previous statement is technically correct. The Bitcoin Core uses would be completely unaware that the miners have fucked-over the Bitcoin XT nodes, and no money would be wasted in the Bitcoin Core world.
The only way to make a double attack is making blocks bigger than 1MB, just one time to achieve it. Easy and most of all cheaper |
|
|
|
No BIP101 (as coded in Bitcoin XT) will activate when 75% of the blocks flag it. The miners being honest or dishonest is not relevant.
Bitcoin XT activation of BIP101 doesn't depend on "exchanges, payment processors, services ..." (or anything else).
You are not correct with your statement. For example, 76% of the miners may choose to fuck-over the Bitcoin XT nodes, by falsely flagging BIP101 - Then opening up the XT nodes to cheap double spend attacks whenever they (or anyone) wants.
You are missing the whole picture. How can a fucking miner sell his prize if all the exchange aren't using his money!?He can't. It's the same as simple being dishonest as a miner, making false blocks or else, the network will just ignore his blocks. Do you think that miners will be happy to make useless garbage blocks, wasting time and "money" because they prefer to? There is no way that this will happen. And this is because my previous phrases are 100% correct, that is needed that large majority of the whole network wants the BIP101 to happen. Can you understand it now? Miners are just complacent slaves, they have no power to change anything and nodes (users/services -> nodes) don't want. |
|
|
|
They are usually spreading false information, false promises in order to manipulate people around here. We've seen it in a lot of threads.
Why is not the opposite? |
|
|
|
Except for the unfortunate fact that Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT are mathematically mutually exclusive.
You are right, but the choice is still in the hands of the users, and not on something else (like a bunch of devs) BIP101 can't activate without the majority of nodes (and exchanges, payment processors, services ...) and miners. None of them will make a change if it doesn't fill the requests of their users. |
|
|
|
@da2ce7 Like the market, it follows the more liquid way. Bitcon is still a place for permissionless innovation, if it isn't possible somewhere, you can try/add it somewhere else. Still, users have the last choice. (while it possible for them to know there there are others ...) You can see here that now is still contributing on XT: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/bitcoin-xt His last message is two hours ago. He is contributing everywhere he can. (whatever you think he is doing is good or bad) He isn't going somewhere and then going back. I think that he is acting without any mutually exclusive way of thinking. |
|
|
|
|
Again, he has never stopped working on Bitcoin, whenever it was Bitcoin XT or Bitcoin Core.
You can go and check even on the pull request on Bitcoin Core.
Even while he wasn't adding code, he was checking the pull requests from the others.
They were a totally false statements from people that were trying to demolish his image the community.
Nothing has changed, you are just seeing the reality and thinking that something has changed, while it has not.
|
|
|
|
The XT crew have made lowcows of themselves. Even Gavin has moved back to working on Bitcoin Core (on github).
He has never stopped. All the claim from idiots that he was stopped developing on Bitcoin was pure shit Maybe all of you should get back to reality http://forums.prohashing.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=650&p=2467 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
