Yes, okay, to be clear, when I try in TCP mode I see the message "Connected.  Sending login request." and then nothing.   You're right that UDP mode does connect and I get to the login screen.   I guess this is just and FYI that the issues for TCP are still there.

Quickseller also has the account FunFunnyFan https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=519804 (which he used to sell a DT account last year and troll me a bit while he was at it).  Also, he seems to be behind the account newtons1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=557356

Just for the list.

When QS was trolling me as ACCTSeller, Panthers52, Quickseller, FunFunnyFan (etc ?), dooglus noticed a little quirk which he does that sorta ends up being like a signature.  I don't think he realizes that not many people do this.  dooglus suggested we not reveal it in case it comes in handy in the future to identify his alts. 

FWIW, that newton1 OP has the same quirk.

Sounds to me like you got the right idea.  Stick to it (for a while) and then retire.  Good luck to you man!

I guess not, at least I have no idea what that is.  Any links or tips?

Yesterday I tried to sign into DT for the first time in a while, it never got past the load screen...

Right, the important thing to remember is not, repeat, not to get into the mindset that you can recover from a large loss.  It's going to happen (it always does, eventually) where you buy in with, say, your half BTC and you get unlucky.  Since you're already way into the black, just accept that loss and come back another day.  If you chase that loss, most likely you'll end up in the red.  That's my advice and congrats on the big wins.

I'd certainly be surprised if there were since PHP is especially created for doing CGI and javascript is especially targeted at controlling a web browser.  I know, i know, that javascript especially is being used for more and more things.  If it turns out that there is such a coin, I'd certainly be interested to hear about it.  In any case, I'm pretty sure that 90% of the coins are just clones of bitcoin in terms of their core crypto so, that's all C++.

I think you can also type "bet:$BETNUM" into the chat to pull up the info for a particular bet.  GeertBerkers says she's got the bet numbers she's interested in.

I know what you mean about the inane questions.  But fwiw, there ought to be a bit more to it than just what pays the most for a given level.  For example, a lot of people consider advertizing ponzi's to be an endorsement of them, so that's a principle which can apply more broadly.  Think about whether you really want to be seen with a particular advert.  Also, some campaigns have a generally poor reputation for being mismanaged, I tend to think of yobit as one one these, although I think that hilariousandco has a lot more to say about campaigns and their management than I do.

Lol, one thing the block-size debate has shown us is that if everyone's going to join, it's probably a good thing that they wait at least a few more years for us to sort out how to get their transactions confirmed reasonably promptly.  Hehe.

Yes, I do see the contrast, and I do think the QR pricing is really cool.  Eventually I'm going to get me one of these, but apprantely that eventually is longer out than I suspected, ha.  I do think that if I had designed it I wouldn't have minted that "historical note".

Nice tip, but I'm a little curious about the nobet thing if Getafe wins.  Normally if you lose a bet on a draw, you lose your money, right?  What am I missing here?

Locking it wouldn't stop them from reading it.  And it would prevent the actual interesting posts (which are somewhere in the first 20 or 30 pages iirc) from being even further buried under mountains of "it didn't work for me!" posts.  It also wouldn't stop people from just reading the wikipedia page on matingale, which actually has quite a bit of analysis.  Whatev, yobit.net posters will apparrantely be bumping this thread for as long as they can get away with it.

I really wish that the OP or some moderators would go ahead and lock this thread.  Anyone who still doesn't know if "martingale really works" after 95 pages of discussion is just not going to learn anything because a few more paid posters add their 2 satoshis.  This thread gets brought back from the dead twice a year and nothing new is ever actually added.

There's a wiki:

http://www.dragons.tl/mediawiki-1.16.5/index.php/Main_Page


You can profit, if you're a lucky gambler.


I think like any gambling, you shouldn't risk more than you're willing to lose.  In a contrary story, I've gotten a 500mBTC jackpot from the "weekly lotto" twice now.  So, it's a luck game, like you expect.

I wonder if you guys are just using different versions of the software.  Perhaps the filtering was added recently?

Hey, Mushroomized,

I've accidentally bet on plants in DT and messaged Di and he actually gave me my money back.  For that reason, I suspect that he just didn't see your message or it fell off his radar before he saw you again.  I'm also pretty sure that if it had been 1.5 bitcoin you would have gotten a response.  The game can be pretty slow and weirdly unresponsive, but I don't think it's actually buggy, just cluncky.   That's been my experience anyway.

Also, I know what you're talking about with that "message a game master" menu item.  I've always just contacted Di in game with "/message Di [your message here]" in the chat box and he's eventually replied to me (as I said, even when I was actually at fault he's given me grace and refunds).

That would actually be a good improvement for vanitygen, to do a validation step to ensure that what's being looked for actually could match a bitcoin address.  I haven't thought about the completeness of the problem but at the very least you could (as you point out) rule out any expressions which explicitly look for [O0I].  I don't think I have the code checked out at the moment or I'd consider submitting a pull request myself.

Thanks DH.  I guess I didn't turn up that wikipedia article in my searching, all I was finding was the online versions of the man pages.  I did go ahead and try using md5deep on a directory, and it told me:


I suppose there's some other way to take advantage of that recursiveness.  In any case, I'm only actually hashing strings with these programs at the moment so effectively, I can expect the deep versions to be equivalent to the nondeeps.

Thanks again for pointing me in the right direction.

On Unices that I use, there's md5sum and md5deep and md5:


For sha, I see sha1sum and sha1deep, sha256sum and sha256deep, etc.

From what I can tell, there's no difference between the output of md5 and md5deep.  And the "sum" versions just adds a " -".  Can anyone let me know what's going on with these variants of these hashing tools?

Thanks in advance!