|
I got two transactions totaling 11 merit also. I believe it took a few minutes for my merit count to update.
The merit was from the captain contest that recently ended.
|
|
|
|
|
How was the scoring done? I believe you could vote against the submissions; how was a vote against a post and/or title handled?
I believe I had two in the bottom table and I voted, but it is unclear where that merit is. Found it.
|
|
|
|
According to the website you linked, 0.00625 Gigabyte/BTC was disbursed, so your calculations are off by a factor of 10.
There were multiple airdrops. The one on July 9 2017 distributed 0.0625 GBYTE per BTC. Funny how you are able to click one link but not the other. The address OOUIJTHWY5PANA7P2YUJX67VVN2QZYIX did in fact receive 35.3 GBYTE on June 6, 2017, and 36.1 GBYTE on July 9. I am unable to substantiate the 0.0625 GBYTE/btc rate on July 9 as stated in the post made by what appears to be a forum user unassociated with the GBYTE/Obyte project. Reviewing coinmarketcap, and the distrubution section of the obyte website, none of the distribution amounts per the blockchain, match the expected amounts based on the total bitcoin linked, and the percentage of total supply per the website. The percentage of the total distribution per http://transition.obyte.org/ also does not match the expected percentage 500 btc should have been per the amount of bitcoin linked per https://obyte.org/#distIt appears likely that OgNasty received GBYTE from 5 distributions. I looked at an old version of the list of treasurer agreements, and the agreement between OgNasty and theymos for the coin in question, and it appears OgNasty's obligations were as follows: After the treasurer receives the Held Amount of bitcoins, the treasurer owes the Forum the held bitcoins and must keep the entire amount safe at a particular address, never transferring them except<irrelevant additional terms> |
|
|
|
First: I've been wondering about this for a while now, and although I don't want to point fingers, I do like transparency so here it goes: What happened to the "dividend" from airdrops based on Bitcoin holdings? http://transition.obyte.org/ shows that treasurer address 1Eog8UqRFLufC71rBLt2nYgfUDskgxAyVF joined the Byteball airdrop with 500.00051 BTC (0.0771% share): -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
OOUIJTHWY5PANA7P2YUJX67VVN2QZYIX
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1Eog8UqRFLufC71rBLt2nYgfUDskgxAyVF
HMdUJW2FnsyZVJAoXhuLuYvt2Zqgdpt5o9xGCqIQqnMVOIyrzkY2ICiwGbAfeCXOiS6SDj/UvRRr+CvIo+zTQJQ=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- shows the GBYTE (now called OBYTE) received on address OOUIJTHWY5PANA7P2YUJX67VVN2QZYIX: on 09.07.2017 13:58:44, approximately 36.174 GBYTE was received. Out of this, 0.0625*500 = 31.25 GBYTE was thanks to forum funds. At the time, this was worth approximately 7 BTC. There were later airdrops too, and Stellar Lumens could have produced a similar amount based on Bitcoin holdings, but I don't think that data is publicly available. According to the website you linked, 0.00625 Gigabyte/BTC was disbursed, so your calculations are off by a factor of 10. If the fork coins were property of the forum, any treasurer would owe the fork coins back to the forum, not the value of a hypothetical trade years before if there was no request to liquidate the fork coins at the time. By my calculation, the amount in question is about $150. Does anyone know the value of the btc returned to theymos? |
|
|
|
Also to the people who are concerned about not getting their BTC in their account balance, Guys, Yahoo is our manager. I dont think you have to worry about it.
What exactly do you think yahoo is going to do? Maybe red trust the Yobit bitcointalk account eh? Hehehe. Seriously speaking, Yahoo didn't guarantee safety of the campaign participants salary. He is only controlling the post quality of participants and nothing else so if ever yobit decided to didn't pay participants then he has nothing to do on that issue since funds is not in escrow. This is the risk on participating on non-escrow funds campaign. We must prepared on all possibilities. I believe the YoBit bitcointalk forum account already has 'red trust', and they are known to be a very shady exchange for years, so none of that will affect them. It also does not appear to have stopped anyone from advertising for YoBit, nor Yahoo facilitating YoBit advertising on the forum. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the catch, and I have edited it to include it. I hope that you do trust the fact that this was a legitimate oversight.
I am not interested in ruining anyone's income or ability to post here, especially for a single possible mistake. I also am not interested in judging others, and am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But back onto the point here:
Oh yes, the biggest issue with college in general is that the government has the faucet open to give money to everyone and then people are going and getting random degrees like underwater basket-weaving and getting nothing out of it and then having the audacity to say that the colleges are the problem or that the government isn't doing enough.
It is not just the government that does this, private lenders also lend without regard to the value of the degrees they are financing. This is largely because of special rules (written into law) regarding collecting defaulted student debt makes it difficult to ever 'get rid' of student debt, and private lenders not even asking about the type of program students are enrolled in. I am not sure if lenders are prohibited from asking about this, but I think it would probably be a safe bet that they are. |
|
|
|
I can save you time. There is no debt to be repaid. There's also a group who already tried to sue, a year ago, who gave up because their lawyers said there was no case, the same as my lawyers said a year ago too.
I would find it unlikely that a group "tied to sue", but didn't because "their lawyers said there was no case", and you, as a defendant would know these facts. A defendant would not typically be privy to conversations between someone who is suing you and their lawyers, and I cannot imagine a situation in which you would know that a group of people was considering suing you but ending up not doing so on the advice of their lawyers. This sounds like you are blowing smoke to me. |
|
|
|
If you asked my opinion, it sounds like you are trying to delay getting sued until after the statute of limitations on your debts expires. I have no idea if what your various investors claim they are owed by you are debts that a court will enforce, but my belief is they would if a lawsuit is filed within the statute of limitations. Your apparent intimidation elsewhere in this thread, and other history makes me believe that it would probably be best for any potential creditors to file a lawsuit sooner rather than later regarding any debts you may have defaulted on. Many businesses fail every day. Don't invest what you can't afford to lose.
This does not absolve you of responsibility if you have personally promised to repay debts incurred operating a business. <> The ridiculous " Many businesses fail every day. Don't invest what you can't afford to lose" line is not going to save him in any criminal or civil lawsuit. <> Businesses do fail every day, and creditors often do not go after debts from failed businesses if there is no money to collect because it often is expensive to initiate a lawsuit to even attempt to collect. If Dean were to make creditors believe there is no money to collect now, but there may be future income that will repay debts in the near future, creditors may not want to sue in court to try to collect. If there is money to be collected, it would be in creditors to file a lawsuit sooner rather than later to protect against the money being spent. Regarding him hoping to delay any action against until a statutory time limit has expired, that will not apply to this situation because he is a UK citizen holding a British passport and there is no such statutory time related issues in UK law. The Proceed of Crime Act 2002 is the section of UK law (especially the money laundering part) which will most probably be used against him and a successful prosecution always leads to jail time.<> I am not familiar with this law. If this is a law that may result in Dean being criminally charged, this will probably not help any of his creditors if he is charged many years from today.Criminal courts often also have a longer "reach" than civil courts, as a criminal court in a location may have jurisdiction over a case that a civil court does not. If one of Dean's creditors were to sue him to enforce the debt, they need to sue in a specific jurisdiction that depends on potentially a number of factors. If the terms of the debt do not specify what jurisdiction's court can hear any disputes related to the debt, a court with jurisdiction over the location of which the debt was incurred can likely hear a case. However the "location" of where a debt was incurred is frequently a more difficult question than it sounds. Different jurisdictions have different statutes of limitations as to when creditors can be sued, and if you sue in the incorrect jurisdiction, the statute of limitations may have expired by the time you find out that court cannot hear your case. My suggestion is for anyone owed a substantial amount of money to hire a lawyer ASAP to get advice regarding possibly suing to collect on what you are owed. |
|
|
|
I think Melissa Korn would agree with a lot of this 
The underlying root cause problem with college is the government is willing to subsidize the cost of college for all students, regardless of their ability to repay, or the value of the program they are taking, in nearly unlimited amounts. This leads to tuition becoming inelastic, and colleges rising tuition at much higher rates than what a free market would support. It also results in colleges hiring a bunch of 6 and 7 figure salary administrators who do nearly nothing, and facilitate the indoctrination of far left ideology within campus. This also gives colleges little incentive to grow their capacity for a larger student body because they are already overwhelmed with money simply by rising tuitions. A lot of yours Melissa's suggestions would create regulations and give everyone less information when making a decisions as to which students to accept, and which schools to go to. I would rather both be better informed. Another problem with colleges is the number of worthless degree programs they offer. If colleges were to offer only degree programs with actual value in the workplace, students who were not interested in 'real' degrees would not apply to college, and this would also eliminate the 'degree inflation' that results in employers requiring degrees when the work does not require any skills learned in college. |
|
|
|
I came across such a situation once. The best way to deal this is to place a small order, if it gets through you can order more. There are sites that are genuine and are selling products at cheaper rates then the original vendors.
You are describing a very good method on how to get scammed for small amounts. |
|
|
|
Also to the people who are concerned about not getting their BTC in their account balance, Guys, Yahoo is our manager. I dont think you have to worry about it.
What exactly do you think yahoo is going to do? |
|
|
|
|
My initial thought was that he was exporting "technology" by having the talk, but the charge may be as simple as him providing a 'service' to NK, which would also be illegal.
I don't think many mixers will accept payment to disclose where coins came from, but it is possible to look at the blockchain to determine where coins ended up after going into a mixer.
|
|
|
|
|
The solution to this problem is really to avoid getting infected with malware. If your computer is infected with malware, and you are interacting with your coin, your coin is likely gone. Once you discover that your computer is infected, you should stop interacting with your coin via that computer and also stop using that computer.
Some malware can change what is displayed on your computer. So if you paste/type a certain address, that address may be displayed on your screen, but the address transmitted to any website you are on would be changed. Even if you are taken to a second conformation page, the website may transmit the address that the malware changed to but your computer would display the original address that was on your screen. The same would apply if you received a confirmation email and read the email on the same computer that is infected.
|
|
|
|
|
I only have a limited amount of sMerit but I got you to be 5 closer to being legendary. I would endorse you becoming legendary.
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
Are there ways to load that file, LoyceV? I opened that page, and it is imcompletely loaded on my computer, so I can not copy and paste it in Notepad for later use.  You can run this python script on your computer if you want to save a file located on the internet onto your computer. import os
import csv
import requests
path = 'http://loyce.club/usernames/usernames.txt'
r = requests.get(path)
with open ('usernames.txt', 'wb') as f:
f.write(r.content) You will need to run the script in the folder you want the file saved to. The script will save the file as "usernames.txt" however you can change this to another file name. The script will access the webpage located at the variable 'path'. |
|
|
|
How will these 2 week pause on deposit/withdrawal will affect Upbit exchange? I guess people will run from it as soon as it will be possible.
These 342,000 ETH - are these users funds or this ethereum was just on the balance of the exchange? If first - is exchange planning to repay losses to users?
I believe Upbit has said they are going to cover the losses out of their own money. Based on the high ratio of the value of the stolen coin to the estimated daily earnings of the exchange, I am suspicious of their ability to do this. I would consider it more likely they will use the two week delay to try to get their customers less interested in withdrawing ether in masse, and operate as an insolvent exchange until they can either earn their way out of the hole, seize coin from certain customers under shady circumstances, or somehow recover the coin. |
|
|
|
It is unusual for large amounts of stolen coin to get transferred to exchanges because hackers know the risk of the deposit being confiscated. It is typical for hackers to send small amounts to various exchanges to see if they can successfully process a withdrawal, or to send stolen coin to various mixers in small batches if any exist. I believe the majority of coin stolen from large businesses in large heists ends up idol. |
|
|
|
It's pretty easy to add a new badge and manually (or automatically) assign it to people, but with the reporter badge I didn't originally consider that people might reasonably want to opt-out of having the badge. Adding that functionality is a bit more difficult. Maybe sometime in 2020.
Disclaimer: I am not a SMF expert Could you implement this similar to how Copper Memberships are implemented? That is, once you reach x number of good reports, you have a 'paid' membership whose only changed permissions are the reporter badge. 'Wearing' the special membership would not affect the person's displayed title (unless this is an additional feature you wanted to offer). |
|
|
|
For example, I love this topic posted by Satoshi because I see the potential as MASSIVE here ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=750.msg8140#msg8140 ). First off, would anyone debate that this is not in regards to S.C's? I asked Nick Szabo if this post was and he stated while vague, he believes that is what Satoshi is referring to (in contrast to Craig Wright who told me he built in S.C.'s from day one which is in direct opposition of Satoshi's words himself lol ). I will respond to one thing satoshi said in the post you cited:
Now, an economist would say that a fraudulent seller could start negotiating, such as "release the money and I'll give you half of it back", but at that point, there would be so little trust and so much spite that negotiation is unlikely. Why on earth would the fraudster keep his word and send you half if he's already breaking his word to steal it? I think for modest amounts, almost everyone would refuse on principle alone.
With SW, it would be possible to craft a signed 'child' transaction the is dependent on the transaction releasing the coin to the fraudster. What satoshi described also does not allow for the two parties to mutually agree to split up the coin, for example if a seller is unable to deliver all of a set of goods due to unexpected circumstances, but SW should allow for this to be addressed as well.
My understanding of SW and LN is it is theoretically possible to have a trust-less cross-chain transaction if both blockchains have adopted SW, or something substantially similar (transactions that can be time locked from the time of confirmation, and the ability to sign dependent transactions without the signed 'parent' signed transaction). This would be most advantageous for people wanting to trade coin for a stable coin (bitcoin for USDT). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
