Did some people actually defending the lack of extra security for their account? I mean why? if they don't want it they can just turn it off, but it always good to have an option. More and more of my internet accounts require 2FA nowadays, and most of them don't allow me to turn it off. It's mainly needed because of the people who don't use proper passwords, share them everywhere, and have a system filled with malware. Those same websites nowadays run a timer to kick you out after a few minutes of inactivity, which makes it even more annoying. To me, 2FA is just a hassle. I have old Gmail accounts that don't let me login with my password anymore.This makes me truely appreciate the old fashed forums that just keep me logged in for years. A browser cookie is very convenient. That being said: as long as it's optional, I'm not against it. But would it really help if someone gains physical access to my mobile phone? I don't want to lose the convenience of being logged in when I use it.
Google Authenticator just told me I can now backup my 2FA codes in the cloud. Lol. |
|
|
|
RBF may not be an acceptable solution for some points of sale, RBF is an acceptable solution in absolutely every case. If you already sent transaction with high fee and it's not getting confirmed, that only means that your fee isn't high enough to get tx confirmed and RBF gives you the possibility to solve that case. I think he's referring to how some services don't accept RBF transactions to prevent double-spending scams. The only reason a service would care about RBF, is if they accept zero-confirmation transactions. In those cases sending a transaction without RBF gets your payment accepted faster, but if you do use RBF, any service should accept it once it's confirmed. |
|
|
|
- KYC with full name, date of birth, location of birth both as in id document (Ledger has some experience with leaks, this is going to be some fun as such identity data needs to be kept safe by three companies involved, good luck with that)
- you have to identify yourself to every backup provider (not bad in terms of security as an attacker might not can fool every provider, but still leaves room to verification issues)
So identity theft is now enough to steal your Bitcoins? Even easier if the identity theft is an inside job at one of the three seed storage companies, they'll know exactly who to target and can request the other shards from the other two seed storage companies. |
|
|
|
anyone up for helping me unstick this situation? You need a reality check: you don't own 75k BTC, you got scammed. If you gave away your domain name, you may be able to go through your registrar to regain access. This is a common scam involving fake crypto exchanges. Scammers create websites and platforms that appear legitimate
~
The key point to understand here is that there are no actual Bitcoins in your account This! The "buyer" is probably not even interested in your domain name, all they want is for you to deposit 3k. Once you've proven to be a sucker, they'll ask for more and more until they bleed you dry. Don't do that. |
|
|
|
Well I've hit another birthday, and it's lonely in the old fogie team. Congrats! Even though I'm late to the party, I hope there's some cake left. I'm thinking of starting an octogenarian group here, but I don't know of any other potential members. I learned a new word today  If you're patient, I'll join the group! Why don't you guys recruit some of the elders you know? One reason: privacy. Other than that, I would know only one good candidate: I've known her my entire life and she doesn't look like her age at all. Maybe I should invite Biden. Send him a PM |
|
|
|
This produces four .csv files which the biggest one is nearly 100 GB of data. Due to the size, I can't load it on a python jupyter notebook. You can read the data into some database that does what you need, or use things like grep and split to get only the lines you need. I am wondering what common programs and strategies that people use to process this data. Can you start by sharing what you're trying to accomplish? I usually pipe the data through some Linux command line tools to get what I need, you'll find some examples in those topics: |
|
|
|
I'll join Username: LoyceV (obviously) Addy: bc1q0nuqwanhqqyt0kyh56jer9863zl6y8f32pgnkg |
|
|
|
Not bad, it works instantly without annoying captcha on Tor browser. The About Us isn't very convincing though: We were founded and remain headquartered in the Netherlands, which means that our users are protected by stringent European consumer privacy laws, including the GDPR. These are widely regarded as the strongest privacy protections in the world. Privacy laws in the Netherlands look good on paper, but many companies and government branches violate privacy laws. Would you trust it if there was written Sweden instead of Netherlands? From what I've seen, privacy laws are okay there, but I've never been there and I have no idea if they're actually enforcing it. Note that I have no reason not to trust Startpage, and I'll only use Startpage.com through Tor without sharing any personal information. It's just great that it works without captcha. Cloudflare alone makes more and more websites completely impossible to use through Tor nowadays. Still, if you still don't like using a third party, then set up your own instance of SearXNG. I won't go that far. |
|
|
|
bravo to those at the top of the list who have chosen crazy alts  Bravo to Bitcoin for beating 90% of the altcoin portfolios  |
|
|
|
The reason I creative this thread is because there were some concerns over this method being provably fair... I know it is, because I know my code and it's legit and honest. I think you're confusing "fair" with "provably fair". If it would be provably fair, you wouldn't have to create this topic. You can now only claim it's fair (as any casino would), and we have to trust you on that. Only if we can verify it, it becomes provably fair. What I'm a little stuck on is... how do I prove it to you? With your current setup, that looks impossible. Even if someone else would check the same APIs to verify if the result is the same, that would open up the possibility for someone with a faster server to cheat and have an edge against the house. Or someone inside CoinCap or CoinGecko could cheat. |
|
|
|
I'm thinking that if someone were to claim to be me then proof they are not me could be an inability to post to the albums. That's what signed messages are for. |
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, why don't you think the rest come from trading? Could be simply a matter of displaying 2 decimals but backend handles with more precision. When I buy or sell Bitcoin, I only get to enter 2 decimals. Maybe it comes from trades against altcoins or other currencies too, but still, the "accuracy" is meaningless. To quote from another discipline: " the end calculation should not have more significant digits than the original set of data". |
|
|
|
Your argument falls apart if there are 50+ people playing. Unless there's an even distribution of bets (which is unlikely to happen every time), it's still possible to cheat. If I did what you said, I would be denying someone a win and most likely giving someone else one.. Anyhow, there is a house edge. Casino's don't have to cheat man. I've seen online casinos cheat. If you're honest, there's absolutely no reason to make people doubt your honesty if you can make it provably fair. straight from the two largest exchanges. Do you know how they come up with the last 16 decimals? I get that 2 decimals come from people buying and selling Bitcoin. Where does the rest come from? |
|
|
|
One thing I considered: What about using these decentralized exchanges / swap sites like Uniswap? It doesn't change the problem of not being able to verify the exact same result. Being used to provably fair, I agree it would be best if the results could be verified reliably. Unfortunately nothing comes to my mind how to keep the current, unique idea, but with provably fair results. Combine block hashes (see for example bitmover's Giveaway Manager) with a seeding event ( see for example RHavar's Provably Fair Seeding Event). It could be setup in such a way that results can be verified right after each new block was found. Or, now that I think about it, it could work entirely without block hashes and only use random data from the seeding event. I know it's not as cool as using Bitcoin price data, but I've never met anyone who uses that up to 16 decimals anyway. |
|
|
|
I considered setting something up to keep my own file of l0tt0.com results so that users could verify from my version that the results on l0tt0.com were the same for them as they have been for me. I think the best would be if us players could fetch the same details from Coinmarketcap and Coingecko and verify the results that way. I considered possibility of setting something like that up too but I cannot dish out cash for paid API personally for that. Even with API access, you'll never be able to fetch the data at exactly the same time as l0tt0 does. I actually got here after seeing your signature campaign thread, and the part about the 16th decimal made me curious. I guess it is a bit of a blackbox how Coingecko comes up with the result. As far as I understand they also use the Coinmarketcap API. And in both cases they use a paid API so we cannot see the results for free. I think that's a bad basis to start from, for something that could otherwise be a nice (and unique) site. |
|
|
|
@dewez: please fix your quote. Your link shows 12 decimals, but the question remains the same: where does it come from? It's not as if the last decimals are "live", the price changes only every few seconds, and when it does, all decimals change. So it makes absolutely no sense to go that "accurate", and I can't find how CoinGecko comes to this result. this is our API: https://www.l0tt0.com/api/price.php which you can view historic prices. it's 100% fair because at the end of the day even if you DON'T trust how I get the numbers- you can CLEARLY see that everyone is getting the SAME numbers. if we both play Quick Pick, and both bet on number 11, and both of us click place bet at the same time.. if the next price update (in 5 seconds) has 11 in the last 6 decimals (one of the three winning numbers of the game) we would both win. therefore there is no way I could show you one number and someone else another.. It's still possible to cheat: even if everyone gets the same numbers, you could pick numbers in such a way that you maximize your own profit. Say someone with a $10 bet should have won, but instead you make someone else with a $1 bet win. |
|
|
|
Yes, bitcoind is using about 2-7% CPU during the loadwallet operation (I'm assuming that the rest of the time it's doing I/O, because iotop says it's doing between 1-5MB/s of reads and writes each). Any chance the system is very low on memory? |
|
|
|
bitcoin-cli loadwallet ... seems to be hanging for no explicable reason. Does it consume CPU while it "hangs"? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
