I feel like a jerk to say that, but those who trust their email to an Outlook server almost deserve it. When will they learn?
Companies are having a hard time getting away from Microsoft. There are open source solutions for all Microsoft products, but employees often don't want to adapt. It's also a legal and insurance issue for some companies that require regular audits because Microsoft products have a better reputation than solutions from lesser known open source vendors. The problem is that Microsoft has successfully infiltrated the educational institutions in the last 20yrs, now they move their userbase to their cloud so that they do not have to care anymore about the userbase buying the next upgrade and can just charge (easy predictable amounts) monthly. I helped a friend some time ago to buy a cheap notebook and setup Ubuntu on it for his daughter. Yesterday he showed me a letter from the school that she needs a Win10 Pro Notebook so that she can use O360 which all the lessons are based on. |
|
|
|
But the 22 connections of my linux host are all back a lot of blocks, why? This is a really nerd project.
I found that if you stop and restart the node, the list of peers gets refreshed with updated heights. Yes, the node is very lazy about updating the heights of the peers, maybe that was a design trade-off at the time. Cheers Graham I am not sure (and haven't checked in the code), but the height shown at getpeerinfo should probably be labeled "startingheight" as it is in other wallets. This would imply that the height shown is the height the peer node had when a connection was made. I don't think that it is getting updated after initial connection was made. (A quick test shows that these numbers do not seem to update after connect, though beware I have a talent for being totally wrong..) |
|
|
|
So my idea that by PoBing at home one automatically provides a listening node to the net is completely wrong, right?
Not a listening node unless configured with listen=1 and UPNP-connected via the standard port. Cheers Graham I believe listen=1 is assumed when the parameter is missing from the .conf file. At least it was this way with all the wallets I used (and with slimcoind v5 too I get inbound connections in complete absence of any listen= setting). Not trying to be a smartass (well maybe a little bit  ) Otherwise my node is still synching, I remember it takes quite some time but I hoped to get more than 300k blocks in 24 hours. You are not using Grahams snapshot, are you? No, I am trying to synch from scratch again. While I understand loading the snapshot would make stabilize the network much faster, I want to see my node synched the traditional way. I tried with snapshot on a (much) earlier occasion and ended up synching from the network so I thought I'd go that way again. |
|
|
|
So my idea that by PoBing at home one automatically provides a listening node to the net is completely wrong, right?
Not a listening node unless configured with listen=1 and UPNP-connected via the standard port. Cheers Graham I believe listen=1 is assumed when the parameter is missing from the .conf file. At least it was this way with all the wallets I used (and with slimcoind v5 too I get inbound connections in complete absence of any listen= setting). Not trying to be a smartass (well maybe a little bit ) Otherwise my node is still synching, I remember it takes quite some time but I hoped to get more than 300k blocks in 24 hours. |
|
|
|
Seriously though, I think we can safely assume that this is not going to happen that somebody intentionally sends you 5m USD without you knowing why or having no idea about the reason for the transfer.
If that ever happened (assuming a very bad error on the senders side), after digging a bit through BEs (as dabs proposed) and listening around here and on twitter, I would probably come to bct and post it here, trusting the guy having fat-fingered 100BTC to me would get to know somehow. If he can sign from the sending address I'd ask an appropriate finder reward (which I'd see at 5-10% according to local law and use here).
You could always just send it back to the sending address. No proofs needed. You're right, the signing is not really needed at all. |
|
|
|
Right now, nodes worth adding are the listening nodes: 185.150.190.19, 185.68.67.37, 144.76.64.49, 144.76.118.44
Well that was quick, 185.68.67.37 has disappeared, now there's only 185.150.190.19 plus my two servers that are listening. I thought restarting the node would be a good idea as the debug.log was getting a little large (not so sure anymore if it really was a smart thing to do). Now from debug.log it looks like a lot of blocks are getting orphaned (but I am not clear if these are blocks I have that are getting orphaned or if some other nodes tries to send me these blocks and my nodes doesn't accept them): ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 00000cace8b563834b09
received block 000008fc93cbf886fc95
CBlock(hash=000008fc93cbf886fc95, ver=1, hashPrevBlock=0000058479ba8308616a, hashMerkleRoot=e3c6a5855e, nTime=1614195519, nBits=1e0f0bab, nNonce=568861, vtx=1, vchBlockSig=3046022100cc7c9c577e1d557b9d8d582de1c7c022732effbc111e209badd62f0bad83002f022100ccc65ca165cbf1bb67a082840b26ef444b4c26f0597f19c58488e0b72cdfbcc8)
CBlock General PoB(nBurnBits=1d033d45 nEffectiveBurnCoins=929843609442 (formatted 929843.609442))
Coinbase(hash=e3c6a5855e, nTime=1614195347, ver=1, vin.size=1, vout.size=1, nLockTime=0)
CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, -1), coinbase 0493aa36600107062f503253482f)
CTxOut(nValue=49.23, scriptPubKey=028dd028c4c118857352f3e5cea9dea2ff402ba8bc55b5f4e57d2a3e0cea6daf9f OP_CHECKSIG)
vMerkleTree:
PruneOrphanBlocks() : Removed orphan block 00000b17c918aa0d1b7e30c630deda150a8fe176dcefa2b8f2d37b6cdc465bf3
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK, prev=0000058479ba8308616a
askfor block 000007f6e62f41090086 -763482112
received block 000003b659de6b48e617
CBlock(hash=000003b659de6b48e617, ver=1, hashPrevBlock=000003bf08e6722d097d, hashMerkleRoot=cba507eea6, nTime=1614201829, nBits=1e0fe072, nNonce=224718, vtx=1, vchBlockSig=3046022100f9ba40fb8553c6eb345f5d2845ecf4989bd7f5eee3771d299d35d10cdc0f0223022100b6c47a63c56d79b32d9bab0f7ae9bf6ee099b26deac975d01639655e2986013a)
CBlock General PoB(nBurnBits=1d01ec8f nEffectiveBurnCoins=929760764127 (formatted 929760.764127))
Coinbase(hash=cba507eea6, nTime=1614201761, ver=1, vin.size=1, vout.size=1, nLockTime=0)
CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, -1), coinbase 04a1c336600101062f503253482f)
CTxOut(nValue=49.90, scriptPubKey=028dd028c4c118857352f3e5cea9dea2ff402ba8bc55b5f4e57d2a3e0cea6daf9f OP_CHECKSIG)
vMerkleTree:
.. |
|
|
|
If I accidentally deposit $1000 to your account, I cannot just say to the bank "I'm sorry, I made a mistake, I want my $1000 back". I have to contact you and kindly ask you to send the money back to me, and you can refuse to do so for whatever reason. Depending on who you are, you certainly can. Hence Bitcoin. Correct. If you have an unexpected windfall at a bank (error transfer) that is classified as "not reasonable" then yes you have to give it back. Sucks, but that's life. Now if you deposit extra money to pay a debt in error then the holder of the debt does NOT have to give it back as it is a payment against the debt. Bitcoin fixes the above issue. That said, if someone dropped 100btc into my account by mistake I would refund it. Because it's the right thing to do and laying claim to something that isn't mine would corrupt my soul. That's worth way more than 100btc to me. I tend to agree with you - in principle, but 100 BTC? I am pretty confident the decision to return that amount would have to age for quite some time with me. But yeah, rather sleep well than keeping something that is not yours. But how would you know perhaps that's a gift to you from some wealthy philanthropist? Or that's dirty mafia drug money? And giving it back would kill lots of peeps? I guess that would be a bit complicated for the owner of the funds to locate you? So not many chances you'd get contacted by the fatfinger?  Sure, a wealthy philantropist sends 100 BTC my way, of course this is a completely different discussion. I somehow get the feeling you also click all the "You have received a donation via google lottery" links in the emails you get, right? Are you saying these "Send 1 BTC to Musk and get 2 BTC back" Twitter campaigns are legit? Because you actually never know if some philantropist... j/k Seriously though, I think we can safely assume that this is not going to happen that somebody intentionally sends you 5m USD without you knowing why or having no idea about the reason for the transfer. If that ever happened (assuming a very bad error on the senders side), after digging a bit through BEs (as dabs proposed) and listening around here and on twitter, I would probably come to bct and post it here, trusting the guy having fat-fingered 100 BTC to me would get to know somehow. If he can sign from the sending address I'd ask an appropriate finder reward (which I'd see at 5-10% according to local law and use here). Given that finder reward, I'd naturally cover all the fees for an express tx @dear-random-philantropist: If you read this, the address on my profile is valid and under my control. If you send me 100 BTC I'll send you back 90 BTC, promise! |
|
|
|
... "Maybe you can add the following ones as well: addnode=185.150.190.19
addnode=178.223.55.155:53184
addnode=185.79.5.221:53014
addnode=145.239.189.106:53042
addnode=178.221.183.154:9715
addnode=46.0.192.98:60366
addnode=94.25.174.181:39989
They are all up to date, but the majority of them are not on the standard ports, that's why maybe we have issues to connect to them. Don't know whether it's the right thing to add the port in the slimcoin.conf specifically. I'm restarting my server with this new addnode lines to see whether it will sync. (The local wallet hasn't started yet)." Generally spoken, connections on non-standard ports are (in 99.9% cases) incoming to the respective node, most often these are wallets behind firewalls or with listen=0 that do not allow incoming connections and you see the port they are connecting from. When compiling nodes lists, one should IMHO filter to those with "inbound": false, as these are definitely listening nodes to which your node connected. That is not to say all others are not listening, but only from those to which your node connected you can be sure of it. Also knowing one connected listening node is generally enough as it informs your node about all the other nodes it knows about. From the 8 nodes my node is connected to, only one is inound: false, all others are incoming connections. I guess there are just not so much listening nodes around right now. |
|
|
|
If I accidentally deposit $1000 to your account, I cannot just say to the bank "I'm sorry, I made a mistake, I want my $1000 back". I have to contact you and kindly ask you to send the money back to me, and you can refuse to do so for whatever reason. Depending on who you are, you certainly can. Hence Bitcoin. Correct. If you have an unexpected windfall at a bank (error transfer) that is classified as "not reasonable" then yes you have to give it back. Sucks, but that's life. Now if you deposit extra money to pay a debt in error then the holder of the debt does NOT have to give it back as it is a payment against the debt. Bitcoin fixes the above issue. That said, if someone dropped 100btc into my account by mistake I would refund it. Because it's the right thing to do and laying claim to something that isn't mine would corrupt my soul. That's worth way more than 100btc to me. I tend to agree with you - in principle, but 100 BTC? I am pretty confident the decision to return that amount would have to age for quite some time with me. But yeah, rather sleep well than keeping something that is not yours. |
|
|
|
MRR and NH are the only hashrenting sites I am aware of. I think a few yiimp based pools like https://zpool.ca/ offer something called hash tap: https://www.hashtap.ca/ but I don't know any specifics you'll have to DYOR. |
|
|
|
|
Nicehash works different than for example miningrigrentals.
In NH you bid for hashrate with a price per hash capacity you set and if there are miners that are willing to rent their hash for that price you get it until somebody outbids you. Then miners that hashed for you, move to the order paying a little more. You can then either increase your bid or wait until miners are again willing to send hash to you for your current bid. Therefor rental duration can wildly vary depending on the current market and is not a meaningful value in the way NH works.
Maybe you want to watch the NH marketplace for your favorite algo a few minutes and you will see how that specific market works.
HTH
|
|
|
|
Only a few dozens blocks until the reward is 0 and the chain stops.
Will be indeed interesting to see what it does to the price if coins can't be moved on and off exchange.Made a fool of myself, didn't read the code correctly (better even, didn't understand the reward function obviously), it just halved to 0.5. * psycodad facepalms, takes out the 'C for absolute dummies' book.. |
|
|
|
Sorry but "Spiegel" is not an serious source any more. Maybe they are right, but we will see what real scientist and not journalist have to say about that. Btw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claas_Relotius was a Spiegel journalist, who faked a lot of stuff. They have no credibility left. At least this is my opinion. I partially agree but he says himself it is not geared toward the scientific community and being peer reviewed, it is instead directed to the german public. Therefor it is written in german and not in english, so there is no danger that somebody who might have an actual clue reads it. |
|
|
|
10,000 years from now when Bitcoin finally goes to zero due...
10,000 years! Ha! It's strongly proven with valid, rigorous proofs in math, science, economics, and behavioral psychology, that bitcoin will collapse this year. What we're watching now is nothing more than random, irrational exuberance. Just do the research! Shorting bitcoin here is the most amazing financial opportunity since Adam and Eve and by the end of the year there will be no doubt that I'm right when bitcoin is worth far, far, far less than it is now. 2022 we'll see the return to sub $1,000. Have a merit on me. That's excactly what I needed to hear to cancel all my sell orders sub 100k.. |
|
|
|
|
WTS 56000 MARS OTC (75% of current market price or best bid)
PM me if interested.
(I do not want to KYC at one the exchanges just to sell my MARS).
|
|
|
|
Yes - this is the bit I can't be bothered with, on other forums you can just paste the image. Pity that.
If only Theymos could afford new forum software. Or to scrape together the shekels to improve this one. SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Powered by SMF 1.1.19 SMF 2.0.18 Released I am pretty confident, important patches get merged from SMF. Bct's SMF is heavily modified (trust system, DT, merits and loads more). It's definitely not just a matter of clicking "update my instance" in the admin GUI as I do with my SMF forum. I for one like bct as it is - it is reliable, fast and over time you know how it works and behaves. |
|
|
|
Actually he used the Moniker "Altoid" I believe. I stand corrected, thanks for pointing it out. I think I've read here somewhere that he used the silkroad account. (But to be honest didn't read it all, just CTRL-F through some docs there). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
