History tells us that all coins have a big bounce after having reached their low, no matter what scam coin it is, look at all the Pre mined coins before...
The low of paycoin will be at approximately 0.000000000000000000001 satoshi. You want us to look at other shitcoins? Here is one that shows you the future value of paycoin: http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kittehcoinWhat about this coin? http://www.cryptocoinrank.com/BitPopcoin Now that's a shitcoin! Well Bitpop paid a lot of people out to end it which I respect quite a bit..... |
|
|
|
The Paycoiners are now talking about suing Scrypt CC/ Marcelo. Gosh, it seems like just yesterday they were all cocky and sure that Scrypt CC would save them from their failed Paycoin investments. They even went further, absolutely certain that this new obvious scam would also resurrect the previous scam they were burned on, and actually make it legitimate and not a scam. Shocking that such well placed confidence failed to work out. Also, exactly what type of fucking moron discusses organizing a lawsuit against an obvious scam they got suckered into while THEY ARE STILL PROMOTING THIS SCAM IN THEIR POSTS !?!?  https://hashclub.org/topic/835/marcelo-suit/2Operation Orouboros- The Scrypt CC snake that eats idiots' bank accounts: https://hashclub.org/topic/315/v3-0-operation-ouroboros-a-scrypt-cc-snake-that-eats-it-s-own-tailKinda sucks if you take loans to invest into ponzi sites which then go belly up...
"Brake even" is all you need to know about the level of intelligence there.
Reminds me of when cmilian (of BTCLend/Lendcoin fame) wanted to sue Cryptodouble.
Cut him some slack, he's Greek and at least he didn't say "110 days to ROI". Plus you're a donkey anyway, Leroy said so! Good luck to them trying to sue Scrypt.cc lol If they thought it was a challenge trying to sue Garza for fraud, it will be quite near impossible to sue Marcello which is neither his real name, nor likely in Brazil. Really, who would have thought that Scrypt.cc would be a Ponzi? What's that you say? They have 850 Gigahash of mining when the Litecoin/Dogecoin network has a total of 1.1 Terrahash? That would ONLY be 80% of the entire network, totally possible..... |
|
|
|
|
Couple things I noticed that you missed changing in the source.
1. in wallet.h the stakesplitthreshold is set at 500, it should be at 1-5 as the default
2. in Coincontroldialog.cpp the fee for SplitBlock is set at 200, should be 0.05 Coins <-- this means that it will view it as costing 200 Coins but where it is handled in wallet.cpp it will cost 0.05 Coins
3. in bitcoingui.cpp
line 1270 if (nHoursToMaturity > 188)
for 7 days it should be 168 hours
|
|
|
|
Someone is steady dumping his CON, I happy to catch it  lol, I had to move my buywall up a bit, currently there is about 4 BTC depth down to about 800. I've asked for a little help with the website security so I can try to get it launched by this weekend and focus more on Blockchain work. I've been thinking a lot about getting into snapshots and redemption into a new Blockchain because eventually I'd like to trim off all the excess blocks and redeem all the current balances into an even more improved chain. CON works very well for liquidity, security and a stable price but it's not enough for me, it needs to be better. |
|
|
|
So everyone knows what to expect today and tomorrow there will be a massive price crash as tomorrow 150,000 new FLY will be released on the market. The price crash will start very soon (today) DO NOT put in large buy orders. Let it fall and crash to the bottom. Yes you read that correctly. This is temporary and planned. For those of you on our private slack channell ,Ill explain why.
Hmm, you could also send Coins as a distribution through Fees. |
|
|
|
So, if XPY were actually used by people a ridiculous number of addresses would start to build up exponentially and get added to the blockchain- bloating it? Yet another brilliant "feature" of Paycoin. Well the Fees are so low (0.001) that you can do that anyways. You could buy 1000 XPY for $10, create a few nodes to send to each other, setup a bash script to cycle these coins among each other and create 1 million transactions. The XPY fees only assume that it will go up in price. A bash script takes maybe 5 minutes to create. Can even make it a little random for amounts and time it sleeps, this was the kind of thing used for the Bitcoin stress tests a few months ago. ---create your script cd Paycoin/src nano send.sh ---add in addresses and intervals, n in {1..30000} means it will execute the script 30000 times. #!/bin/bash for n in {1..30000} do ./paycoind sendtoaddress PJW2iA4ij87aXt9iEpFnKwMS876VL978Tk5e 0.02 sleep 20 ./paycoind sendtoaddress PCam3E876QQfrErkwo2duZCq86NJpDv87G $[ ( $RANDOM % 20 ) + 10 ] sleep $[ ( $RANDOM % 45 ) + 72 ]s ./paycoind sendtoaddress PMZgRztjFPq54sAGk2rAHSqRhzvZ864TX5S $[ ( $RANDOM % 20 ) + 10 ] sleep $[ ( $RANDOM % 56 ) + 63 ]s done --crtl+o to save --create it as an executable script chmod +x send.sh --run it as a background process nohup ./send.sh & |
|
|
|
People get paid for doing this sort of thing?  Considering getting rid of the last of my miners, so some sort of BTC income would be nice. You (anyone) can use any of my existing images for free. A mention and/or tip where they would be used would be appreciated, of course. P.S: Someone noticed something odd with the new (hours old) Paycoin Wallet already. https://paycointalk.org/topic/580/multiple-superfluous-addresses-in-wallet-whyNot sure what this means. Crestington? Any idea what is going on with this multiple address issue? Did someone accidentally include part of the shuffle mixing script that auto generates new addresses into the coin code? LOL. Edit to add: The "XPY Testnet Overlord" is not even remotely concerned.  Some fucking "testnet overlord". If I were "XPY Testnet Overlord",and there was something unusual in a newly implemented code that I could not explain, I would be concerned about this being a bug or similar. Maybe this is an issue, maybe not, but the offhand flippant manner in which this idiot brushes this aside (while claiming to be "XPY Testnet Overlord" no less ) is emblematic of the whole drunken clown circus that is Team Paycoin or whatever the fuck these con men are calling themselves today. Well seeing as they haven't changed addresses to return change into the same address, you would have many extra addresses from dust. What is more concerning is their maxclockdrift still set at 2 hours when the minimum time to Stake is 1 hour. static const int64 nMaxClockDrift = 2 * 60 * 60; static const int STAKE_MIN_AGE = 60 * 60; I suppose you could modify the client in order to use what is termed as litestake which uses std::map that tracks the block height and the last time the wallet hashed on this height. The big issue here is that you could modify it to hash into the future by a couple hours and would give you a clear advantage, drop difficulty and produce more Blocks per day. http://bitcoinist.net/interview-presstab-pos-vulnerabilities/ This means that before the code tweak, we would create 60 hashes at a time, but after my code tweak we could all create 900 hashes at a time. This radically increased our chances of staking by 1400%. If we were to use my code on Peercoin, we would enhance our chance of staking by 11900%.
Or a Peercoin clone.... I mentioned this vulnerability some months back but couldn't be assed creating the client to do it. Here is the LiteStake code addition to try if anyone is game enough to create the modified client and has some XPY. https://github.com/Crestington/PayCon/commit/6d6f887b4b249d0ca972a6d402c75df8772f2e5e |
|
|
|
Is the update not mandatory?
No, the update is not mandatory. The changes between the last versions are client side and was the addition of Multi-Send GUI to replace Stake For Charity (graphical interface change) and a small fix to the hashsettings to return false if inputting an invalid value where previously if you put in an invalid value it would crash the client. You can still use Stake for Charity in the RPC calls, Multi-Send is just a better method. Mandatory upgrades are if there is a change to rewards, base hashing difficulty, time drift (allowances or accepted time differences), min/max ages, or Block times, basically anything that has to do with the core protocol. |
|
|
|
Yes that should be the correct version listed there. |
|
|
|
at 0.046 BTC, if 7k Coins are produced during POW, that would be 322 BTC ($74k) or value the entire moneysupply at $1.6 million. I could see why he would remove it because it would be for the most part unsustainable. Then why did he write this in the first place? Looks pretty sketchy for me. Nah, just wants to keep a high price but better to wait until after POW to figure out a marketcap. |
|
|
|
Hey man, i worked on the website a bit, but then about 4 days ago they cut my internet, as i'm passing to another isp. Dunno how much this will take. Keep it up  Thanks, I'm working on the website little by little every day, I'm focusing right now on clamping down the security so I can launch it. |
|
|
|
Current price is: .046 BTC per coin. PLEASE do NOT sell for less than .046 BTC and we can keep this price!! Why is price so low now? It's nowhere near 0.046 BTC. Big dump happened? .05% chance of superblock 10 Is this typo? Do you mean %0.5 chance? You removed your post of .046 BTC per coin, why??? When will we see a bigger exchange for FLY? Any update here.... price keep on dropping... at 0.046 BTC, if 7k Coins are produced during POW, that would be 322 BTC ($74k) or value the entire moneysupply at $1.6 million. I could see why he would remove it because it would be for the most part unsustainable. |
|
|
|
I heard suchmoon was Asian
FYI: Suchmoon and his fancy "moonship" coffee mug:  Here is the interesting part. Grab your tinfoil hats and listen up. Suchmoon may very well actually be a Paycoiner named "Plumpkatt". Here is a recent pic with Mrs. Plumpkatt (aka "Plumpkitten" ) during their recent giant mouse hunting expedition to Florida. Note how he cleverly hides his sleeve tats on his left arm in this pic:  (pic edited by myself to remove children. Nothing else was touched... ) Click here to read about the Paycoiners' community effort to help fix Plumpkatt's van (had a serious tire wobble on one side- maybe the passenger side? Blown cords in that tire perhaps? Just a guess) and get it and himself legal to get the clan down to Florida for some serious Katt on Mouse action. All travel bugs know late summer is the best time to visit balmy FLA. Discuss..... Unless Suchmoon has recently had all his tattoos removed on his left arm which is the cause of his misfortune of needing to raise funds to go to disneyland, I can only see that he has a doppelganger. This Plumpkatt guy looks quite happy, good on him for going on his trip to Disneyland.  |
|
|
|
The reason I say this is that in the last 20 years we have seen the hottest years on record.
Volatility has been greater perhaps but fact is we have a 21 year cooling trend and the powers-that-be have been funding lies. And humans can't alter the climate. They can alter their environment yes. But we can't have that debate here. There is an entire thread about that in Politics & Society thread entitled something like, "Reddit bans debate on Global Warming". The debate is uninteresting to me. Only people who haven't really studied the science or who lack IQ (or rationality and motivation) will think there is still a question on this matter. For example, the smart posters such as Spendulus and Wilikon know this. I am saying I don't want to debate it. Waste of my time. Apologies I am not trying to be condescending to you. I hope you expend the effort I did to study. I am done on that topic. I raise your attention to the Little Ice Age that is already starting. Btw, anecdotal the weather is getting much cooler in the Philippines. Used to be so damn hot here when I first arrived in the 1990s. Now I can jog in the middle of the day. Maybe I've acclimated, but we have all these other strange effects going on such as severe drought. The USA climate is radically changing too with drought and the Pacific NorthWet is now the NorthDry. My mother in Washington State loves the change in the climate. I went into great detail about how the volatility in warming was part of the shift into global cooling some where in my archives of one of my usernames. I can't possibly go dig that up now. Edit: a Little Ice Age is not the same as an ice age. It is sufficient lowering of temperature to cause drastic climate effects which impact food supply and natural disaster frequency. It will not be ice every where. I don't want to get into it too much because it is a bit off-topic for the discussion so this is the last point on the particular subject. North America, Australia and New Zealand have all seen their hottest years on record recently, I've been there and experienced that. I'm also not saying that the data of the output of the sun cycle may be wrong either because there can be both. To say we do not have an impact on the climate is still foolish, because we do but let's say he is also right about the declining output of the sun by 2030 and we receive this mini-iceage, then it would not be so severe as he thinks because it's already being heated up, even needed to restore that balance.  I don't see how this is possible when they have been planning to setup trade routes now that the ice has receded so much. http://www.cfr.org/arctic/thawing-arctic-risks-opportunities/p32082 |
|
|
|
I don't know much about Armstrong. I have a feeling it's not really modeling any of this stuff to the extent people claim, and is only using primitive calculations like figuring out the total amount of liquid capital on earth, finding what markets it resides in, then just like how wind is a pressure gradient, uses past market history as a prediction model, then calculates where money flows from there.
So yea, it's a lot of work linking together all those prediction models of each sector, but it could give you very accurate analysis. The only problem is, you're not being told to "buy google on X day", you're just being told when things like gold are likely to be in a bear or bull market. This prediction analysis is probably used to shave money from the market with indexes yearly, and I bet it gets them wrong a decent amount of time as well. There's no way it can't get things wrong a lot when we have a centrally controlled market, unless he has a friend working at the 50 tentacle squid.
Armstrong has stated that predicting specific events and the short-term is much more noisy. Precisely for the reasons I have stated, which is that the chaos relevant to our needs is much more dominant in that case. His model is incorporating the largest database every assembled on this subject matter. He invested over $1 billion in inflation adjusted dollars just compiling the database. His A.I. models have searched for hidden order in many dimensions. And thus the model is likely more sophisticated than you are contemplating. It does do short-term prediction, but with time and price as orthogonal predictions, thus leaving a wide variability for outcomes. For example, back when oil was $100+ the model predicted that if time and price coincided, then the closing price for 2014 for oil could be $54, which was precisely the outcome. So yes the big turns of major macro economic trends are much more predictable. For example, back in 2012 he predicted that the DJIA stock market would reach at least 18500 by 2015. It was unclear if the phase transition would be before 2015.75 or after, and it was dependent on whether the public confidence in US stock market would invert its public vs. private role and join private assets for their renewed bull market after 2015.75. This one stuck out to me as one that did not fit as a trend that we would see an ice age by 2030. We Are in the 21st Year of Declining TemperaturesIt is amazing how government is trying to claim the existence of global warming, simply to introduce a carbon tax. We are entering the 21st year of declining temperatures; not rising temperatures. This is akin to the tax on cigarettes; people smoked less and governments cried that they were losing revenue, causing many places to tax electronic cigarettes. Governments are also losing tax revenue as cars have become more efficient. Gasoline sales have declined as many cars now have pollution controls with better gas mileage. Additionally, more people are buying from the internet and driving to the local mall less. The solution to the collapse in tax revenues: states are now preparing to tax people based upon the number of miles they drive, requiring odometer readings to register cars. It is never about what they pretend to care about – it is just a new scheme to raise taxes. Regardless of the truth about global warming, governments need this bogus research to raise taxes. The global warming crowd is the MOST unethical and corrupt group of pretend scientists ever to exist. When I was called upon for research to form the G5, I wrote the White House a warning that manipulating the dollar down would create volatility and a crash within two years (1987). I was told I would never again be asked by government for anything. They told me outright that I was to conduct the studies –– government would provide the conclusion up front –– and I would earn millions each year for bogus research reports. I said, “No thanks!” This is how the government conducts and funds studies. They ALWAYS tout the desired end result to support some predetermined objective. Government studies are simply an exercise in political corruption, no matter what the field. Global warming is another great scam. Clearing the air – yes, we all want that. Yet it is extremely arrogant to assume we have the capability to alter the climate cycle. The reason I say this is that in the last 20 years we have seen the hottest years on record. I have been through many places, snow has declined, summers have been hotter and this is through observation, when I was a kid the winters were much colder, more snow, and the summers were cooler. Would it not be arrogant to assume that we do not have the capacity to alter the climate with our billions of people, cars, factories and fossil fuels to warm the climate? This is not negating that the government would doctor studies for their own personal gain but to say one study is saying climate change is not happening is a poor data set to go by because I can link to another article that says the complete opposite such as this one on the reduction of the polar icecaps over the last 20 years. http://www.dw.com/en/polar-ice-sheets-melting-faster-than-ever/a-16432199 |
|
|
|
The problem is, dyask, that you cite objective reasoning as your main motivator behind your assertions about scrypt.cc, yet you clearly fail to apply it correctly, which usually implies intentional bias. This is the reason why you are being challenged so vociferously, because your attempt to come across as analytical ends up reading like a veiled apologist.
What is wrong with trying to be objective? I'm not making assertions either but I guess you don't really understand what an assertion is. As far as applying my knowledge, how would you know what I'm doing? I'm one of the few that managed to get out of BTCarbs whole, maybe I was lucky but I didn't do buy just screaming scam, scam, scam! For the record the BTCArbs admin that paid some people back, claimed is was intended to be real and not a scam at all. With LTCgear, I'm in vastly deeper than here and that is mainly because some of the people here screaming scam about scrypt.cc were singing LTCgears praise. That one burns but I'm going after my losses there multiple ways. LTCgear stopped paying last December. With scrypt.cc things look really bad, I'll grant you that. We don't know what is really going on there but lately it has just been getting worse. I've had many chats with Marcello the Admin there in the past and I don't believe he is out to hurt people, however, I don't know if he is in control. It fact it would appear that whoever is currently running scrypt.cc has no problems with outright theft. I'll take steps, but my current focus is just to minimize losses. This could play out for many months. At no point have I ever not claimed these types of investments aren't risky. The closest claim to supporting scypt.cc I've ever made, is saying a much shorter time to breakeven gives people more options for how to manage an investment. However, that doesn't apply to scrypt.cc anymore because it isn't possible to get your investment out easily. Until the "hack" it was always easy to get your money out of scrypt.cc, that was important and something that set it apart in a lot of ways. That when on for well over a year. That has changed and it changes everything. I don't mean the up to 24 hour delay, that could be lived with. I mean getting withdraws is extremely difficult an appears to mostly require a lot of luck.
For the record every BTC related investment I've been involved in has been called a Ponzi, except for the loaning sites which have so many other scam borrowers. That includes all the sites that have been cleared as legit too by providing proof of mining. As an example there people jumping up here and there claiming hashnest is a scam, at least on the hashnest chat. Seeing a scam is easy. Avoiding them or getting out of them isn't so easy unless you don't diversify. EDIT: I've been burned before at scrypt.cc and recovered there too. I don't know if this is the end or not, but the hit this time is very minor. Don't invest what you can't afford to use is the best rule to follow on every type of investment. The problem is that you have a vested interest in keeping the scam going long enough for you to get out. I have no problem calling a spade a spade as I won't let other people hold onto my own funds. But you complain that people are posting links to collective evidence pointing to why it is a scam because it hinders you from your exit. Let me ask you this, what cloudmining site have you invested in that hasn't been a Ponzi scheme? so far I see BTCarbs - Collapsed Hashie.co - Collapsed BTCjam - Collapsed LTCgear- Collapsed Scrypt.cc - Collapsing BTCjam is a lending site and it hasn't collapsed but it is riddled with scams. Hashie.co was only 0.005 BTC, that wasn't an investment, it was a test. I have a vested interest? Well that is true with LTCgear, but nothing else. With scrypt.cc I'll try just like everyone else to pull out some BTC. Why wouldn't I? What in the world is wrong with that? I'm not trying to keep it going and there is nothing I could do in short order to promote it or stop it. (Long term is different) However you have missed the bulk of my crypto investments: CEX.io - At least until the maintenance fee forced everyone to shut down. I used bots there a lot for a while. (I wrote the bots) PTS/AngleShares - I even wrote my own miner for that one. This has branched in many directions. It was very fast on the i7 processor I used. Many different investments through Havelock including b.buy & b.sell which are 100% virtual. Many, many BTC worth of mining rentals not to mention local mining. (After all I wrote my own PTS miner) Bulk of BTC mining is now at Hashnest because it is cheaper than what I could do. Tons of BTCjam loans, been scammed a lot there, more than any other place AMHash which I sold days before it when scam. GAW where I just gained a little. I could have gained a lot if I has sold out more. Mining and selling xpy for one week was great! People renting rigs made profits and so di the rig owners .. win/win. In fact I have turned up my nose at Genesis mining, Mining Sweden and Get Hashing only because the price was so high that I don't they will ever hit breakeven, at least for people that didn't join early. Anyway if you diversify you are going to be bitten sometimes. EDIT: I was really against Hashnest when it came out because it was very expensive and there wasn't a market. They added a market for the shares and that made all the difference. Get Hashing is also evolving so what I said about it may no longer apply. Fair enough, I didn't dig all the way back to the beginning and will ease up a little as I appreciate the detailed response. I wish Bitcointalk would just do what GetHashing does and if it does not have any proof or seems fishy, that they would just put it on the watchlist as it would pretty much solve this whole scenario. |
|
|
|
The problem is, dyask, that you cite objective reasoning as your main motivator behind your assertions about scrypt.cc, yet you clearly fail to apply it correctly, which usually implies intentional bias. This is the reason why you are being challenged so vociferously, because your attempt to come across as analytical ends up reading like a veiled apologist.
What is wrong with trying to be objective? I'm not making assertions either but I guess you don't really understand what an assertion is. As far as applying my knowledge, how would you know what I'm doing? I'm one of the few that managed to get out of BTCarbs whole, maybe I was lucky but I didn't do buy just screaming scam, scam, scam! For the record the BTCArbs admin that paid some people back, claimed is was intended to be real and not a scam at all. With LTCgear, I'm in vastly deeper than here and that is mainly because some of the people here screaming scam about scrypt.cc were singing LTCgears praise. That one burns but I'm going after my losses there multiple ways. LTCgear stopped paying last December. With scrypt.cc things look really bad, I'll grant you that. We don't know what is really going on there but lately it has just been getting worse. I've had many chats with Marcello the Admin there in the past and I don't believe he is out to hurt people, however, I don't know if he is in control. It fact it would appear that whoever is currently running scrypt.cc has no problems with outright theft. I'll take steps, but my current focus is just to minimize losses. This could play out for many months. At no point have I ever not claimed these types of investments aren't risky. The closest claim to supporting scypt.cc I've ever made, is saying a much shorter time to breakeven gives people more options for how to manage an investment. However, that doesn't apply to scrypt.cc anymore because it isn't possible to get your investment out easily. Until the "hack" it was always easy to get your money out of scrypt.cc, that was important and something that set it apart in a lot of ways. That when on for well over a year. That has changed and it changes everything. I don't mean the up to 24 hour delay, that could be lived with. I mean getting withdraws is extremely difficult an appears to mostly require a lot of luck.
For the record every BTC related investment I've been involved in has been called a Ponzi, except for the loaning sites which have so many other scam borrowers. That includes all the sites that have been cleared as legit too by providing proof of mining. As an example there people jumping up here and there claiming hashnest is a scam, at least on the hashnest chat. Seeing a scam is easy. Avoiding them or getting out of them isn't so easy unless you don't diversify. EDIT: I've been burned before at scrypt.cc and recovered there too. I don't know if this is the end or not, but the hit this time is very minor. Don't invest what you can't afford to use is the best rule to follow on every type of investment. The problem is that you have a vested interest in keeping the scam going long enough for you to get out. I have no problem calling a spade a spade as I won't let other people hold onto my own funds. But you complain that people are posting links to collective evidence pointing to why it is a scam because it hinders you from your exit. Let me ask you this, what cloudmining site have you invested in that hasn't been a Ponzi scheme? so far I see BTCarbs - Collapsed Hashie.co - Collapsed BTCjam - Collapsed LTCgear- Collapsed Scrypt.cc - Collapsing |
|
|
|
Where in hell is the money for withdrawals coming from?
scamtos took my money, again.
I strongly suspect the majority of these payments is fake. The go to addresses of the administrator. Then perhaps through a mixer service and as a "deposit" back into Hotwallet. Someone on IRC said that at the beginning of this project, the KHS were sold for a value of 1€. So theoretically the Admin has somewhere lying around several tens to hundreds of million dollars. I think it is not so much, but he definitely has enough reserves to pretend activity. When the KHS were sold for that much there were far fewer KHS. By the time there were millions that price was very low. A better measure of the possible wealth is the new and old hot wallets that had something like 44657 BTC pass through them. https://blockchain.info/address/19mcjofGwKxGwhaZwDwPjdWd1KrFCZgoJJ (6000 BTC & growing) https://blockchain.info/address/1HWqsgnSd12Gv8SpoUMi1Cj8hp79BTSpW7 (38657 BTC) The second one goes back to the beginning of scrypt.cc. So if you are going to estimate possible gains assuming a pure Ponzi, that is the data to use. That is not good data to use because you don't know how much of that 6k or 38k are the same coins being moved around in circles to trick people into thinking that something is happening. scrypt.cc would move deposit money around to just inflate the appearance of deposits. While I'm sure they could do it, why would they? Deposits used to move into 1HWqsgnSd12Gv8SpoUMi1Cj8hp79BTSpW7 now they move into 19mcjofGwKxGwhaZwDwPjdWd1KrFCZgoJJ. Those are the so called hotwallets. This has been confirmed many times by different people. If you make a deposit right now it will be moved from your deposit address to 19mcjofGwKxGwhaZwDwPjdWd1KrFCZgoJJ. It is very likely that these two addresses show all the money that has been deposited into scrypt.cc. The hard part is sizing the withdraws. Prior to the hack many different addresses funded withdraws. Now there only appears to be 1Bidh2XFr9JzfXppeZd2cPKpbnJGvqCY4h. However no idea how long that will last. So we really don't know how much of the 44657+ BTC has been withdrawn. This data is much better than holding up a thumb and saying I heard KHS used to cost 1 euro so that means "he" has pulled in millions. There you go making assumptions again.... Whether you realize it or not, you are perpetuating the scam by defending Scrypt.cc in any way. Either have irrefutable proof of the data you are analyzing or don't bother posting because it shows you really know nothing at all. |
|
|
|
Hi guys, anyone knows which are the Hotwallets he used to send the last round of payments?
If someone could post the Hotwallets here I would really apreciate it.
Withdraws have been coming from: 1Bidh2XFr9JzfXppeZd2cPKpbnJGvqCY4h Deposits have been going to: 19mcjofGwKxGwhaZwDwPjdWd1KrFCZgoJJ Lately the deposit hot wallet has been funding the withdraw wallet. It wasn't direct like that before the hack and also the withdraw wallets used to change a lot. It seems this process is being managed differently now.
What you are doing is gossiping. Maybe you just what things to be said that you can attack. None of us knows why the 37MHs was taken form many accounts. (Some people claimed other amounts.) Maybe it is a part of a string of thefts or part of another hack or even some crazy set of bugs ... I don't know the why and I don't know anyone that does know.
im starting to understand why it says Warning: Trade with extreme caution! below your username. why would you care? the site stole from you and you are trying to understand why instead of trying to gain back what you own would you accept this from any service provider? The negative trust is from ThePhwner who put a false claim against me. I returned the favor and gave him the negative trust too for lying about me. If he wants to have it removed he can msg me and we will both remove the negative. However the trust doesn't mean anything on me because I'm not trying to trade with anyone here. I don't support scams or even encourage people to make investments in any crypto site. I've been invested in many places so I've been caught in some scams. I've actually avoided more scams than I've been caught in. As for the scrypt.cc, of course I'm trying to get my losses back. I just try to stick to what I know and I pointed out some information ThePhwner was using was factually incorrect. That earned me the negative trust.  ThePhwner instead of admitting he had picked up some bad information, accused me of supporting Ponzi scams with the negative trust. For proof he used some posts where I thought BTCTrader was more of a scam than BTCarbs. That was over a year ago and I never encouraged anyone to invest in either site. How is that supporting a Ponzi? Due to the low quality of many members here, trust doesn't really mean anything any more. Right now there is plenty of negative stuff about scrypt.cc. No sense in getting mad about throwing about someone pointing something being said was false. As far as my comment that kken01 responded too, some of the posters here are just trying attack people. They don't want facts they just want to appear self righteous. Don't ask me why because I don't understand that mindset. Where in hell is the money for withdrawals coming from?
scamtos took my money, again.
I strongly suspect the majority of these payments is fake. The go to addresses of the administrator. Then perhaps through a mixer service and as a "deposit" back into Hotwallet. Someone on IRC said that at the beginning of this project, the KHS were sold for a value of 1€. So theoretically the Admin has somewhere lying around several tens to hundreds of million dollars. I think it is not so much, but he definitely has enough reserves to pretend activity. When the KHS were sold for that much there were far fewer KHS. By the time there were millions that price was very low. A better measure of the possible wealth is the new and old hot wallets that had something like 44657 BTC pass through them. https://blockchain.info/address/19mcjofGwKxGwhaZwDwPjdWd1KrFCZgoJJ (6000 BTC & growing) https://blockchain.info/address/1HWqsgnSd12Gv8SpoUMi1Cj8hp79BTSpW7 (38657 BTC) The second one goes back to the beginning of scrypt.cc. So if you are going to estimate possible gains assuming a pure Ponzi, that is the data to use. That is not good data to use because you don't know how much of that 6k or 38k are the same coins being moved around in circles to trick people into thinking that something is happening. The datacenter move only showed a small part of the claimed 850 GHs was possibly on LTC network. (~150 GHs or so)
Do you really think that if you repeat this long enough it will become true? There was no such thing. There was no visible reduction in LTC network hashrate that would have lasted for ~48 hours and would have coincided with the "move". If you have proof to the contrary you're gonna need to post the block times and by extension we can then figure out which pool "admin" was supposed to be mining on. Two birds with one stone, good deal. It is also technically impossible to perform such a move within that timeframe, even at 150 GH/s. That's ~500 Titans or ~1500 Terminators. Ask anybody who's done these things if you don't believe me. Let's get one thing straight, you are the one repeating themselves over and over, not me. There was a drop. May 14 2015 39,268 -5.30% 1,124 GH/s May 10 2015 41,466 6.91% 1,187 GH/s You don't have any proof that drop wasn't caused by scypt.cc. The only thing we can say for sure is that there wasn't anywhere near 850 GHs removed from the LTC network. There have a few bigger hits too, so this isn't proof that the drop was from scrypt.cc, the timing just lines up. At the time fast average dropped like a rock. The real problem isn't the hit, it is the speed of the recovery. The hit timing match up but the recovery was quicker than it should have been. At the time the hit was very visible on the 504 average. Additionally scrypt.cc has always claimed the they mostly mine other alt coins besides LTC. So we don't have real proof either way and there multiple things that could have happen that would have produced the same results. So all we have is a lack of proof of 850 GHs. Maybe we have proof of a smaller amount, I do agree it isn't great proof.Why do you continue to shill for a scam site? You are attempting to create proof by making assumptions, if it were to be legit in any kind of way then the owner would provide proof of mining and solvency. No proof = Scam Attempting to perpetuate the scam by making false assumptions for the sole purpose of trying lure in new marks in order to retrieve your own Coins back is a form of scamming. I'm not shilling. I'm pointing out the data for that event can mean a lot of different things. When have I ever encouraged anyone to deposit any BTC at any site, let alone scrypt.cc? I haven't and I won't. Right now if you put BTC into scrpyt.cc the odds are way against you ever pulling it out. Currently people at scrypt.cc are also suffering from numerous thefts. How is that shilling? You are free to use your "No proof = Scam" standard. I'm free to analyze data for myself and to draw my own conclusions. For the last 2 months you have only posted on Scrypt.cc and BTCjam threads. In your "proof" you commonly use the phrase "possibly" and "likely" which is creating false assumptions backed by 0 actual proof. The only proof can come from admin of the site, not from you. 1. 850 GHZ is enough to fork LTC. 2. Mining if it were in Brazil, would cost TWICE as much as a developed country such as US. 3. No proof of any mining ever. 4. Loss off KHS/MHS. 5. Physically impossible to move a data center in the timeframe given. 6. Delayed and lost BTC withdrawls, hacks, and auto reinvest. 7. No communication with holders despite the site actually functioning as a security, no face of the company and no contact details Stop making assumptions about things you do not know and do not research properly, there is no "derp derp, what if" so please spare us your analyzations. |
|
|
|
The datacenter move only showed a small part of the claimed 850 GHs was possibly on LTC network. (~150 GHs or so)
Do you really think that if you repeat this long enough it will become true? There was no such thing. There was no visible reduction in LTC network hashrate that would have lasted for ~48 hours and would have coincided with the "move". If you have proof to the contrary you're gonna need to post the block times and by extension we can then figure out which pool "admin" was supposed to be mining on. Two birds with one stone, good deal. It is also technically impossible to perform such a move within that timeframe, even at 150 GH/s. That's ~500 Titans or ~1500 Terminators. Ask anybody who's done these things if you don't believe me. Let's get one thing straight, you are the one repeating themselves over and over, not me. There was a drop. May 14 2015 39,268 -5.30% 1,124 GH/s May 10 2015 41,466 6.91% 1,187 GH/s You don't have any proof that drop wasn't caused by scypt.cc. The only thing we can say for sure is that there wasn't anywhere near 850 GHs removed from the LTC network. There have a few bigger hits too, so this isn't proof that the drop was from scrypt.cc, the timing just lines up. At the time fast average dropped like a rock. The real problem isn't the hit, it is the speed of the recovery. The hit timing match up but the recovery was quicker than it should have been. At the time the hit was very visible on the 504 average. Additionally scrypt.cc has always claimed the they mostly mine other alt coins besides LTC. So we don't have real proof either way and there multiple things that could have happen that would have produced the same results. So all we have is a lack of proof of 850 GHs. Maybe we have proof of a smaller amount, I do agree it isn't great proof. Why do you continue to shill for a scam site? You are attempting to create proof by making assumptions, if it were to be legit in any kind of way then the owner would provide proof of mining and solvency. No proof = Scam Attempting to perpetuate the scam by making false assumptions for the sole purpose of trying lure in new marks in order to retrieve your own Coins back is a form of scamming. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
