John Mauldin... The Bitcoin blockchain technology allows for the most secure electronic transactions ever devised. Its adoption and acceptance seem inevitable to me.
Actually the 'security' of transactions is not derived solely from blockchain tech. More essential is asymetric crypthography. PoW is 'just' used to avoid double-spends (find consensus), which in case you're going to back bitcoin with gold anyway can be solved more easily using a centralized ledger (with asymetric crypto to sign transactions). It will be used to validate everything we purchase: stocks, homes, investments, airplane tickets, etc. It will be a far cheaper and much more secure way to validate your ownership of anything, from your home to your stocks.
Bold claims! We have the same problem as with a gold-backing of tying tokens in the blockchain to the real world. If centralized institutions (courts, police) are necessary for enforcing property rights anyway, why not have the ownership ledger managed by those (or related) institutions, too. If you need mechanisms external to the blockchain to go from 'token control' to 'legal property', I don't see much added value of using a blockchain. (It changes a bit with smart property as envisioned by Mike Hearn (leased car functions only on blockchain ownership proof), but that's a long way to go still and I doubt Mauldin is thinking of this. Also a derivative products can be built on top of blockchain-based tokens more securely than on central-ledger-based ones. Also: paying dividends and holding votes based on stock ownership can be integrated into a blockchain if it is linked to a liquid value-carrying monetary ledger) So, Mauldin 'getting' those potential applications and 'not getting' the fact that bitcoin is the best (better than gold) sound money we've ever had (w/o backing) seems strange to me. It can probably be explained easily by looking at his portfolio... very similar really to Peter Schiff in that regard. |
|
|
|
I must ask, where does the "treXor plugin" pop up. I never had problems installing the correct plugin, but I want to help out some other people if they try to accidently install treXor
Now I'm really confused. Which one is the malware, the trexor or the treXor? I guess I should hold off on buying a Trezor until I know which plugins I can use.
There is no trexor or treXor plugin. A typo (trexor instead of trezor) by bigtimespaghetti was picked up on by kkurtman, me and (I think) mickeyB. We were trying to be funny. I guess we failed. It's true, I was trying to be funny. I completely underestimated the naivety of people. Epic fail. there are no jokes when discussing secure bitcoin storage I aplogize. However, I wish to note that there would've been no harm done if someone followed the advice not to install the treXor plugin. It's not like we told anybody to do anything harmful. |
|
|
|
Either way there is no need to use Tor to maintain privacy.
There isn't? What are other ways? |
|
|
|
It seems safe to assume Tor is broken now. erm did I miss something? I second this question. The article merely explains how the paper explains how bitcoin nodes can be pushed from tor and forced to connect through clearnet by triggering DOS protection against the tor gateway IPs. Doesn't imply tor is broken at all. btw: there's still a simple way to hide your IP when making a transaction: Hide in the mass of people using the same electrum (or obelisk, or ...) server. Yes, you have to trust the server operator to not store your IP or to not give it out. If you can't bring yourself to do that, just run your own server and get other to use it. |
|
|
|
Also erstmal muss ich sagen dass ich die Schweizer nicht verstehen kann, ich hätte eine solch eindeutige Wahl wirklich nicht erwartet. Interessanterweise waren die Umfragen vor ca. 1 Woche noch zwischen Ja/Nein ausgeglichen. Erst in jüngster Zeit ist es so krass umgeschwenkt auf Nein. Hätte mehr von den Schweizern erwartet. Naja, sind sie halt auch 'dabei' jetzt. Könnten auch gleich den EUR nehmen. Go BRICS! |
|
|
|
Let's see if claims pick up in the afternoon.
yes, we'll be watching they picked up (22 in newest slot 12:00-16:00). for comparison: same slot yesterday had 19 claims. so: no sharp dropoff. |
|
|
|
sure, so there is some mined ones - didn't check every single input of course. Doesn't help either interpretation since anyone can mine coins. Proving things beyond doubt from blockchains alone will be hard though because there can always be doubts constructed. If you want to stick to the lucky whale theory, fine with me aswell. I don't buy that though. I think it's up to the people to decide for themselves if an incredibly lucky whale was buying 575k coins at exchange (all of them from airdrops directly, only few coins mined but no coins that have been transacted on the chain before between people) Or the much more likely answer for people who are not biased from holding bags: Balduro, who is hiding himself and does an unsupervised airdrop is giving coins to himself like everyone would in his situation Wether people want to buy into a coin with an unaccounted for premine of 50% where there are clear indicators of laundering that for private gain or not will ultimately be up to everyone themselves. Sorry for yelling. What i hate is corruption and people biased from bagholding is exactly that. Maybe that's why i tend to flip a bit. I think i'll be watching the discussion from here for a bit while looking around the chain some more. Doubts can always be constructed of course. I can only say caveate emptorfacts are: -balduro is as gone as he can be (probably hiding in a cave in the mountains with his laptop) -the airdrop/premine is not accounted for in the slightest way Your yelling is excused (I get emotional too from time to time, especially when I suspect people misusing their power to enrich themselves) and I value your your input. You are right: everyone is biased by his portfolio and it can be extremely hard to accept facts that mean ones position is unprofitable or one has helped a criminal or things like that (see the pirateat40 fiasko for example). I guess we'll just have to live with the uncertainty for a couple of months. Greatest danger is balduro not burning the remaining premine. Until then, investing in AUR is a gamble with extreme risk (and extreme potential reward). It is anyway because we don't know wether it'll work at all. Everybody has to decide on his own what he does and wether he can live with the potential consequences. Again: thanks for your input, I'll try to keep an open mind and I'm pondering more intensive blockchain analysis (don't really have the time, though)... I know, it's hard to prove stuff conclusively, but more data would indeed be good. I'll be digging and keep you posted about new finds.
yes please. in normal font  |
|
|
|
but it could be a big whale accumulating. The incoming transactions you point would be withdraws from the exchange (most likely cryptsy).
he bought 575000 coins all from wallets that claimed directly from airdrops with no exception - not even a single coin!? Not possible, sorry. And withdrew them all like that in the same hour from cryptsy? 575k? Equivalent of more than 2 weeks of tradevolume of the whole market? Around that time airdrop was 318 so he would have bought 1800 airdrops without buying a single coin that was traded to someone else before? In fact he would have bought more airdrops since the smaller ones are in it aswellThink again! can you stop YELLING, please? here's a whole bunch of exceptions: http://explorer.auroracoin.eu/tx/43d0d9c1943a6f20d4a231d177593120baa7d9bd61ae0278dadcbcbe4f413e3c#o0all mined coins it looks like, no airdrop coins. This tx outputs to ANArcr1CNx15LeTVmTcTDowX7GzkXsk5yV, so it's one of the inputs you claim in huge red letters are purely airdrop coins, which is wrong. Another possibility: cryptsy coldstorage |
|
|
|
for sake of transparency, here's the bitcoin-abe sql queries that produce http://explorer.auroracoin.eu/claims.3.html
select
(extract(year from block_time) || '-' || extract(month from block_time) || '-' || extract(day from block_time) || ' ' || (extract(hour from block_time)::int / 4) * 4 || ':00:00')::timestamp as t,
min(block) as min_block,
max(block) as max_block,
count(distinct block) as blocks,
sum(tx_count) as tx_count,
round(sum(block_minutes)) as block_minutes,
round(sum(tx_count) / sum(block_minutes), 2) as rate_per_minute,
round(sum(tx_count) / (sum(block_minutes) / 60), 2) as rate_per_hour
from (
select
max(b1.block_height) as block,
max(to_timestamp(b1.block_nTime)) as block_time,
round(((b1.block_nTime - prev_block.block_nTime) / 60), 2) as block_minutes,
count(distinct txout.tx_id) as tx_count,
round(case when (b1.block_nTime - prev_block.block_nTime) = 0 then 0 else count(distinct txout.tx_id)::numeric / ((b1.block_nTime - prev_block.block_nTime) / 60) end, 2) as rate_per_minute,
round(case when (b1.block_nTime - prev_block.block_nTime) = 0 then 0 else count(distinct txout.tx_id)::numeric / ((b1.block_nTime - prev_block.block_nTime) / 3600) end, 1) as rate_per_hour
from block b1
inner join chain_candidate cc1 on b1.block_id = cc1.block_id
inner join chain_candidate p_cc on p_cc.chain_id = cc1.chain_id and p_cc.in_longest = 1
inner join block prev_block on prev_block.block_height + 1 = b1.block_height and prev_block.block_id = p_cc.block_id
left join block_tx on block_tx.block_id = b1.block_id
left join tx on tx.tx_id = block_tx.tx_id
left join txout on txout.tx_id = tx.tx_id and txout.txout_value = 63600000000
where
cc1.chain_id = 11 and cc1.in_longest=1 and
to_timestamp(b1.block_nTime)::date >= '2014-11-25'
group by
b1.block_height,
date_part('hour', to_timestamp(b1.block_nTime)),
b1.block_nTime, prev_block.block_nTime
order by
b1.block_height
) as i
group by t order by t
;
select now(), count(*) as claim_count, sum(txout_value) / 1E8 as claim_sum
from txout
inner join block_tx on block_tx.tx_id = txout.tx_id
inner join block b on b.block_id = block_tx.block_id
where txout_value=63600000000 and to_timestamp(b.block_nTime)::date >= '2014-11-25';
Not sure how accurately this catches the amount of claims. Might be off quite a bit. It makes 2 assumptions, for example, that are not necessarily true: - airdrops happen in separate transactions (not by sendtomany)
- all transaction outputs with value of 636 are airdrop
|
|
|
|
Your explanation would also imply the hypothetic whale you talk about would have been extremely lucky to buy these exact amounts from these different wallets and nothing else. It's not possible.
This is not true. The trades that happened on exchange have nothing to do with the amounts in the transaction. That's just the cryptsy wallet... everything is mixed there. cryptsy auroracoind just looks for 100k AUR worth of unspent outputs when the whale withdraws. if that was the case it would imply 90 people or more deposited in a row to their cryptsy wallets without anyone depositing other things inbetween. But the theory does not even need to be discussed anymore in the light of ANArcr1CNx15LeTVmTcTDowX7GzkXsk5yV I looked at ~25 blocks in a row from around the time manually and >95% of transaction (>100 tx) were of amount 318 (12.5 coinbase excluded). It's not implausible. only take your time to look at the incoming transactions to this wallet
ANArcr1CNx15LeTVmTcTDowX7GzkXsk5yV
I'm not ruling out it's baldur abusing his power, but it could be a big whale accumulating. The incoming transactions you point would be withdraws from the exchange (most likely cryptsy). As you said: the blockchain doesn't look 'natural'. That's because it isn't. Noone is using it for much of anything else than claiming airdrops, depositing and withdrawing from exchanges. Of course it looks like it looks. I'm tempted to do address clustering to try to (dis-)prove the inputs you point to are coming from cryptsy, but it's a lot of work for me... keeping an open mind... |
|
|
|
also noteworthy: the last 9 hours (or more) not a single airdrop has been claimed ... suddenly ... after two days ago there were many hundreds claimed in a day (far more than what would be credible) how is this very sharp, almost impossible drop in demand for airdrops to explain all of a sudden?   looks pretty believable to me. last 3 days claims numbers have consistently dropped at night and (4:00 and 8:00 time slots). EDIT: Just checked: the "t" in the stats is the end time of the time slot, not the start time. So it makes sense: people sleep from 0:00 to 8:00 Same today, just it takes longer because people have been partying last night and now they have a hangover? Or just no new people are reached any more and existing ones have sucked all the claim infos from their friends and relatives by now? Let's see if claims pick up in the afternoon. |
|
|
|
Your explanation would also imply the hypothetic whale you talk about would have been extremely lucky to buy these exact amounts from these different wallets and nothing else. It's not possible.
This is not true. The trades that happened on exchange have nothing to do with the amounts in the transaction. That's just the cryptsy wallet... everything is mixed there. cryptsy auroracoind just looks for 100k AUR worth of unspent outputs when the whale withdraws. |
|
|
|
finally someone with half a brain!
it's easier to engage with you when you stop insulting people, btw. I'd be happy if we could keep this productive?
I'm specifically looking at transactions of size 636 (there are 41 of them since 11/27. There are 2 categories:
you can look at transactions of 1272 and 2544 too since these are compiled from 636s (2 times 636 is 1272 and 3 times makes 2544) So you can basically look at every single transaction in that wallet! More than just 41 airdrops received in there. The 954-ones are compiled of 318 and 636 airdrops btw So this is all 100% airdrop money in that wallet , 68000 coins in total received It's still within the realm of the possible. Maybe this guy just ran around in bars and stuff and payed people give them their claim info? I'm not saying it's the case, but it's quite possible imo. So it still stands, imo: this example is not adequate to prove scamming. yeah, I know. This one is more interesting than the one we discussed before. Been looking at a similar one ( http://explorer.auroracoin.eu/tx/ef7773c4ee18be87f7167eef0fcc08f177da277a00491a64b181e28186a14f25#o0) which has even more of those 318 AUR inputs. I note that almost all of the previous outputs are from airdrop transactions.This allows an easy (and likely imo) explanation: we're looking at the cryptsy wallet, specifically a large withdraw of a whale that has been buying (volume on cryptsy before Aug 3rd when this tx happend fits). People have been claiming directly to their cryptsy addresses (keys owned by cryptsy, that explain how so many airdrop private keys can be controlled by a single entity). This makes sense from a user perspective, too: why fiddle with auroracoin-qt if you just want to sell on exchange? Of course it also allows for the explanation (malicious actor) you favor, but as long as there's a 'legitimate' explanation, there's no proof of scam so far. I'm still making up my mind and looking for evidence. Help appreciated. |
|
|
|
I'm looking at http://explorer.auroracoin.eu/address/AYEkRf9fNbLVkCTjHBpKHZD1X578TaYK6g because it was mentioned lately by lackofabettername. (I'm not saying the accusers are wrong, just taking a look as they are correct in suggesting.) I'm specifically looking at transactions of size 636 (there are 41 of them since 11/27. There are 2 categories: - Transactions that come from an address with a huge amount (seems directly from airdrop) example
- Transactions that come from an address that has exactly 636 that was previously filled from airdrop (it seems) example
So... 41? To be honest, I think this is a bad example if you want to accuse someone of scamming. Looks to me like someone is buying the airdrops of his friends and familiy (or collecting and exchanging to fiat for them). The timing of the transaction also supports this. There was a similar pattern on this address with the previous airdrop (318). I'm not worried by this example at all. There are others, though... |
|
|
|
I must ask, where does the "treXor plugin" pop up. I never had problems installing the correct plugin, but I want to help out some other people if they try to accidently install treXor
Now I'm really confused. Which one is the malware, the trexor or the treXor? I guess I should hold off on buying a Trezor until I know which plugins I can use.
There is no trexor or treXor plugin. A typo (trexor instead of trezor) by bigtimespaghetti was picked up on by kkurtman, me and (I think) mickeyB. We were trying to be funny. I guess we failed. |
|
|
|
Damn. Bitsofproof heller you with 'securing' the funds, right?
Does it somehow improve your ego trying to hurt my reputation? No it doesn't and I apologize. Thank you for helping the btc1k team handle the funds. |
|
|
|
Now we get it The refunding process is now started  Huge sry for that big delay. We make it highly secure to get access to the coins. awesome! It would probably be entertaining and educational if you wrote down that story. |
|
|
|
Anyone else get there keyboard driver screwed up by the Trexor plugin? makes it impossible to actually send.
If you installed a trexor plugin instead of the trezor one, this could be your issue. Be careful, the treXor plugin most likely contains malware. It is also known to cause problems with some usb hw, because when trying to infect with a keylogger and trezor sidechain attack execution toolset, some usb firmwares get their reset procedures triggered because of side-effects in the way the network stack is co-infected on some realtek NICs (likely race conditions in buggy southbridge bus controllers) Just use the official trezor plugin and you should be fine. It contains no malware. (EDIT: this is a joke, there is no trexor plugin.) |
|
|
|
dear people who wait for the refund:
we have spent another 3 hours of tryin unsuccessfully getting this going. it seems we made it very very very (very!) safe a year ago to protect the btc1k funds from theft. turns out that it is so safe, that we now have difficulties of getting it to work properly. currently we cannot access the coins. we will keep working on it.
i apologize for the ongoing delay.
we will keep trying.
600watt, bulleric
Damn. Bitsofproof helped you with 'securing' the funds, right? |
|
|
|
Hey molecular, is it totally impossible for me now
to get the coins of 2nd phase which I missed ?
Good luck, g
I have no idea. I'm not involved in running anything airdrop-related. I would assume, though, that airdrops 1 and 2 are over now and no more coins can be claimed from them. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
