there is not a lot of people trade there
And literally nobody buying |
|
|
|
|
Any example/link? I am not sure I ever saw one of his thread
|
|
|
|
LOL
Cosmodude only responds with;
" its a really good coin "
He must be trolling, or he needs a spokesman
It's even worse actually: We are trying to make a real good coin.
|
|
|
|
An official web site launched: www.florincoin.orgIt is very basic at the moment, but suggestions are welcome. Add favicon + logo |
|
|
|
Hello,
here is a proposal for a slight protocol modification, which could solve the follwing two issues related to anonymity:
1. In order make an anonymous transaction the receiver of the money must generate a new public/private key pair.
This can get cumbersome if the receiver is, for instance, a web shop merchant. Here it would be preferable if the merchant could post a fixed public key on his web site.
But on the other hand, neither the merchant nor the buyer wants that everybody can see all transactions to the web shop.
2. It is a good idea to keep the secret keys in a secure, tamper-resistant wallet (e.g. a smart card). But it is unfortunate to store many secret keys on a resource limited device.
One solution would be to derive all private keys from a master secret. But than you have to maintain a database associating your private keys with their derivation data.
The solution to both issues stems from the following simple oberservation:
An ECC public(P)/private(s) key pair is related by the formula
P = G*s, where G is the fixed generator point of the curve.
The generator point G has been choosen by the curve constructor(CERTICOM). This point is only a random point on the curve. Any other point on the curve would be an equally well generator point.
If we multiply G and P by the same random number r, we get
P' = P*r
G' = G*r
and it follows that
P' = G'*s
With this trick we get a new public key P' an a new generator G' to the same secret key s.
Therefore we redefine a public key by the pair of points (G, P).
(i.e. the generator of the curve is no longer fixed but part of the public key)
Due to the Decicional-Diffie-Hellman assumption, two public keys (G,P) and (G',P') for the same private key s cannot be associated.
(i.e. we get untraceability)
The basic protocol flow would be as follows:
1. The receiver posts some randomly choosen public key (G,P) for his fixed secret key s on his web page.
2. The sender blinds the public key by multiplying it with a random number r and calculates (G',P')= (G*r, P*r)
3. The sender generates a transcript. (The hash of the public key must now consist of two points G', P')
4. The sender sends the transcript and the blinded public key (G', P') to the receiver.
I suppose the modifications to the bitcoin protocol would be moderate.
I can also see any security and performance impact.
I don't see how this would increase anonymity This would require OP_CONCATENATE which is deactivated Also, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=232787.0 |
|
|
|
Ctrl-C Ctrl-V I INNOVATIVED!! |
|
|
|
|
Is there any ETA for the new newbies rules?
|
|
|
|
|
How is it innovative?
I didn't find that in OP
|
|
|
|
Newbies:Would you trust this?  Then do not put your money where it told you to put it. Read, learn, read, learn, read the altcoin subforum, and then if the coin doesn't seem very scammy, you can invest.
|
|
|
|
|
I know some people are fine with colors and such things, but an option to delete/hide them (the colors) wouldn't hurt anybody and isn't hard to implement so would it be possible to implement it?
Also this would make the forum ad (just after the first post) more eye-catching
|
|
|
|
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[message, beginning and end whitespace / newlines ignored]
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
So you want to use a different way of formatting than RFC2440? (i) This isn't PGP (ii) This reduces errors (iii) This isn't PGP  Anyway that's not my point, you copy the '-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----' syntax so that's strange not to use the message syntax too If this is not PGP and can't even bear to hear about it when you propose such a thing then use another syntax like '^^^^BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE^^^^' Also, etotheipi will soon implement a signing format in Armory and will talk about it to the bitcoin devs Do you want to make another format?  (ii) Yeah, people made on purpose the RFC2440 because it creates more errors |
|
|
|
Personally I think litecoin has the power to grow. I don't think it should be an "alt coin" as much as a different flavor of crypto coin.
Power to grow or not, it is an altcoin. Period. Also, if you accept altcoins it won't be 'Bitcointalk 2.0' but 'Cryptocoin 1.0' |
|
|
|
I tried starting up a Bitcoin forum back in 2011. It was largely unsuccessful, despite being the 2nd result in Google when searching anything like "Bitcoin forum". I own bitcoin-forum.net, and would be game to try starting something up again, now that the Bitcoin userbase is much, much larger than it was in 2011.
I prefer more modern, web 2.0 stuff. The forum software I ran was Xenforo, and, while it was neat and pretty, there are still some minor issues with it. Because of this, I am pretty open-minded about what software to use, depending on what is necessary to integrate the features I'd want.
All of this said, I would be interested in being involved in a project to develop a new, better forum. And here's what I'd do differently: I'd charge a small amount of Bitcoin for each account, say, 0.02 or 0.05 BTC (no one could register or post without paying the Bitcoin first), and hand out bans liberally (though where appropriate, of course). Sockpuppet? You're banned. Post something rude/disrespectful? You get a warning, and get banned the next time you do it. Etc, etc. This would provide a small stream of revenue to support the forums, keep the forums useful and relevant, and keep all the trolls at bay (unless they just have a ton of money to blow on alt accounts).
So students or poor people can't register but scammers who got money scamming can? |
|
|
|
should be reported to mod, have/will you?
Yes, I reported it but only as a fake, I didn't see then that he spammed that all over the forum When spamming I think it's easier to post here |
|
|
|
R1mlin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=62805;sa=showPosts1 Local / 한국어 (Korean) / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:50:17
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
2 Local / Nederlands (Dutch) / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:49:33
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
3 Local / 中文 (Chinese) / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:47:18
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
4 Local / Deutsch (German) / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:46:54
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
5 Local / Română (Romanian) / News on: Today at 20:29:02
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
6 Local / Português (Portuguese) / News on: Today at 20:28:30
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
7 Local / Italiano (Italian) / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:27:53
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
8 Local / India / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:27:35
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
9 Local / Français / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:27:15
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
10 Local / עברית (Hebrew) / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:26:48
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
11 Local / Ελληνικά (Greek) / News on: Today at 20:26:30
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
12 Local / Трейдеры / Закрывают btc-e.com on: Today at 20:26:07
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
13 Local / Новички / Закрывают btc-e.com on: Today at 20:25:42
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
14 Local / 中文 (Chinese) / News on: Today at 20:25:18
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
15 Local / Biete / News on: Today at 20:24:59
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
16 Local / Mercado y Economía / News on: Today at 20:24:31
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
17 Economy / Trading Discussion / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:24:05
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
18 Economy / Economics / News on: Today at 20:23:45
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
19 Bitcoin / Mining / News on: Today at 20:23:24
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify
20 Economy / Service Discussion / Close the BTC-e.com on: Today at 20:22:55
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/22/anonymous-bitcoin-operator/
ReplyReply Reply with quoteQuote Notify of repliesNotify |
|
|
|
Useless countermeasure.
With such easy captha protection spammers can easily create thousands of accounts, if they want.
Instead of annoying 4 hours post restriction better to create 1 hour delay between posts.
Know, where are a lot of newbies in world, but I'm reading this forum for a months before one reply in very important topic and had waited for 4 hours...
Useless? Surely you wasn't there when it was decided... |
|
|
|
Why did you delete the OP in the thread you're pointing to?
Because I shared information on that thread that, perhaps, I should not have. Ah ok Yeah I think you should have left it there |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
