Someone just told me that the channel in fact is not private, only my account was manually banned by the channel admin. But that makes no sense because my account is only a few days old and I have never been to that channel. That's really messed up  Either way, based on what those individuals demonstrated so far this is clearly another fork that I am going to dump as soon as I can. |
|
|
|
me too stuck @501450
Same here, maybe we are actually on the right chain?  i think yes but peopole what mining? Then, diff is 1.00 can you mine a block ? Where do you see diff 1.00?
22:28:08

getmininginfo
22:28:08

{
"blocks": 501450,
"currentblockweight": 0,
"currentblocktx": 0,
"difficulty": 1873105475221.611,
"errors": "",
"networkhashps": 1.37030310266546e+019,
"pooledtx": 0,
"chain": "main"
}
|
|
|
|
fail to fork?
Looks like wallets cant get to block 501451 2017-12-28 18:25:48 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.15.1/: version 70015, blocks=501451, us=193.70.35.157:60134, peer=2 2017-12-28 18:25:48 ERROR: AcceptBlockHeader: Consensus::ContextualCheckBlockHeader: 0000000000000000004b269ece007638e0992a83ac12210565a45d101544dae2, not-hardfork, incorrect block version (code 16) 2017-12-28 18:25:48 ERROR: invalid header received 2017-12-28 18:25:48 ProcessMessages(headers, 82 bytes) FAILED peer=2 2017-12-28 18:25:49 CreateNewBlock(): block weight: 812 txs: 0 fees: 0 sigops 400 please use the latest code from the official github I am using the latest source code from github and getting the same error:  Can anyone provide any working node address that's beyond block 501450, please?the admins disappeared from both their telegram channels
Can you please tell me what's the second telegram channel? On their website I see only 2 telegram links: Seg_wit2X, which is read-only, and Segwit2Xfork, which is private and not accessible:  |
|
|
|
Instead of sending the BTC to ourselves and having to reveal our public key why don't we just send you a signed message proving we are owners of a particular address.
Your public key is your address and you logically have to "reveal" your address if you want to receive any UBTC to it, the UB team is great but not telepathic. |
|
|
|
|
So 4/23/2018 is the day when the price drops significantly. Really useful to show this prediction so that everybody can sell at the same time. It may even crash the market.
|
|
|
|
when is the aidrop going to end? someone did the math about the depletion for the premined coins? it's 4 years?
Not even close. I think the best guess is around 4-6 months IIRC. why? circulating supply is only 2 million, if you add 20% each month from airdrop, that is only 400k each month, we need to reach 16 million premined No. Out of that 16 million, all April snapshot BTC holders are guaranteed 50%, unless they claimed prior to Nov 2nd, then they already got 100%. So the reserve wallet is correct, just under 5 million to give out. So it depends how soon all those BTC holders claim their BTX. Regardless, it won’t take more than 6 months. ah i missed the 50% part, that make everything faster, still 4 months was a low estimate Both of your math is incorrect. It wasn't "50% unless 100%", it wasn't mutually exclusive, it was compounded. And in total it's much higher even than that. Looking at my transactions I can see the following: +100% (first round) +small airdrops +25% extra aidrop +50% (second round) +small airdrops By now I am around 250-300% of my original snapshot BTC balance. So it's not "50% unless 100%", it's not even 50%+100%, it's way much more already! |
|
|
|
imported a private key to test with. Has to rescan, which strangely took an hour.
There is absolutely nothing strange about that at all. |
|
|
|
I would like to warn everybody about this project. One of the admins on Telegram just tried to increase their legitimacy by claiming that anybody can study and check their source code, while in reality no such code is published, which another admin consequently admitted. Here is the proof:  Either the first admin knowingly and willfully lied or he is an idiot that doesn't know what he is talking about. Either way, you probably want to think twice if this kind of people is somebody you want to have anything to do with. |
|
|
|
|
Sigh, this thread probably should have been made self-moderated.
|
|
|
|
if it gets a price (with deposits supported on exchanges)
As long as these requirements are not completed by the developers, it won't be supported."
That's for the people and exchanges to decide, there is nothing the developers can "complete" about it. Not the smartest answer from Ledger. The devs need to be transparent and maintain the true spirit of BTC fork to ensure confidence in investors. Investors, bloggers, and reporters are all waiting for the SBTC announcement since the fork. They should do better to make sure those entitled to free coins do receive them, otherwise, SBTC will get many haters that will not buy the coin just like BitcoinDiamond. The traded volume is not a good sign for SBTC. Well, nobody is perfect and we can see with each and every fork that the execution is never great. No matter who, all of those people (teams) always seem to be late, to rush things that are still unfinished, to forget thousands of important things, and the communication, presentation and advertisement lack as well. They feel they need to focus more on some parts of the projects since they don't have enough (human) resources to focus fully on everything at the same time, you think their priorities are weird and they should do this and that instead. Nothing you can do, and maybe nothing they can do, it's what it is This is a more general problem of a rapid development/release/whatever, not specific to only the SBTC team. Are there any wallets and block explorers available already?
SBTC wallet is of course available, otherwise the network couldn't run. I thing that exchanges finally found the way how to stop all that scammy forks of real bitcoin. Only [Futures] and that's it. Go and fuck yourself now. Just check the website of "so called " new fork under the name of bitcoinX https://bcx.org/ https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoinx/ It looks like made by a Nigerian scammer in internet cafe. Fucking scammers. $77 for a "scammy" coin is actually not bad at all. |
|
|
|
Total Payout : User : 6490 - 73417,09228292 BTX
That means that there is some 1.9 million BTX in circulation among people, after all those additional airdrops. So in the beginning there was probably way less than 1 million BTC who actively joined BTX, out of 16 million BTC in circulation. What do you mean? There are 11,9 million bitcore in circulation, 16.7 million if you count the airdrop wallet. He means 1.9m in BTX are in wallets which signed up for the weekly airdrops, based on the above total payout amount for this week. Exactly. I don't care about millions of coins that are "wasted", I am interested how many coins are being "active", i.e. whose owners somewhat care and actively do something with or about them. If you look at UnitedBitcoin case the numbers were actually quite similar. When they forked they confiscated all the existing bitcoins except those that they deemed "active", which by their definition meant that given address made a transfer back to itself within the last month before the fork (a rather weird definition of activity because you should never reuse addresses and use the input as a change address). At the moment of the fork there were 16.7 million bitcoins in circulation and they confiscated 15.9 million, so roughly 0.8 million bitcoins were "active" by UB's definition. |
|
|
|
|
What a smart move to make the ANN thread 6 days after the fork. Conspiracy theorists would speculate that you did all your could to keep the number of BTC holders getting their UBTC as small as possible, and thus in the end to keep as many (seized) UBTC as possible to yourself in your "foundation".
|
|
|
|
if it gets a price (with deposits supported on exchanges)
As long as these requirements are not completed by the developers, it won't be supported."
That's for the people and exchanges to decide, there is nothing the developers can "complete" about it. Not the smartest answer from Ledger. |
|
|
|
Total Payout : User : 6490 - 73417,09228292 BTX
That means that there is some 1.9 million BTX in circulation among people, after all those additional airdrops. So in the beginning there was probably way less than 1 million BTC who actively joined BTX, out of 16 million BTC in circulation. |
|
|
|
you can use this site to check your if addresses includes any Super Bitcoin balance : http://sbtcwallet.orgEveryone watch out, this is an obvious scam aimed at stealing your private keys. It doesn't even mock properly the alleged function of showing balance for given address, it shows "Balance : SBTC". Pathetic. |
|
|
|
0.0075 BTC, about half the BTG value, 8 times more than BTX. |
|
|
|
Is there functional mainnet already?
Of course, fork already happened, new blocks are being mined (498935 vs original bitcoin 498892), everything is hopefully fine (although last block was more than half an hour ago). EDIT: all good, 498958 a minute ago. Do I have to sync all the blocks from original Bitcoin blockchain (80GB+++) before I can mine with Super Bitcoin's qt wallet?
Bitcoin blockchain is 155 GB currently. |
|
|
|
|
4 hours till the fork, maybe less. And they fixed the client name.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for telling us. I already have highlight this among our internal team which will be feedback to the dev team. Once again thanks a lot for going the extra mile to tell us.
No problem. I was reviewing the changes from the original Bitcoin Core so I noticed this. Super Bitcoin is the first and to my knowledge the only Bitcoin fork that is actually a git fork, that makes watching the changes incredibly less difficult. Kudos to the developers for that! interesting, so bitcoin cash didn't do that? No, neither bitcoin gold or any other upcoming fork I have seen. If you look at the Super Bitcoin github you will see a small text " forked from bitcoin/bitcoin" and also the Compare button. This allows you to easily find out what exact revision of the original Bitcoin Core code the SBTC developers used as a starting point and what exact changes they have made ever since, to the last letter. So anybody can very easily see all the changes and also it's much easier for the SBTC developers themselves to cherry pick future Bitcoin Core improvements. The whole development of the fork is then much more transparent. No other fork did that*, all the others just took some (to us unknown) revision of Bitcoin Core, made their (to us unknown) changes and uploaded the whole thing back to github as a new independent project, without any link to the original Bitcoin Core. That means we have no easy way to review their changes, they have no easy way to rebase their code to a newer Bitcoin Core revision, it's all much less transparent and much more obscure. The reason why they didn't properly fork the source code is a mystery to me (well, either stupidity or intention to obfuscate their work, I don't see any other explanation). (* with the exception of segwit2x code which is also a real fork but that fork never actually happened) |
|
|
|
Thanks for telling us. I already have highlight this among our internal team which will be feedback to the dev team. Once again thanks a lot for going the extra mile to tell us.
No problem. I was reviewing the changes from the original Bitcoin Core so I noticed this. Super Bitcoin is the first and to my knowledge the only Bitcoin fork that is actually a git fork, that makes watching the changes incredibly less difficult. Kudos to the developers for that! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
