I use gmail to get notification, about new personal message , but last week few notification I found in spam folder with tag : Be careful with this message. Lots of other people have marked similar messages as phishing scams, so this might contain unsafe content. Learn more Is this normal? here only to me it happened? I think this is pretty normal, gmail has been known to mark bitcointalk emails as spam before. Just make sure that the email is comming from noreply@bitcointalk.org and you should also visit the site yourself to reply instead of clicking the link in the email. |
|
|
|
Actually, I think Coin.mx was shut down not for helping criminals (that just seems to be something the media says every time something involves Bitcoin; all bitcoiners are criminals apparently  ) but rather they didn't have the licensing to be transmitting such large amounts of money. Of course, some of that money may have come from criminal activity, but they were not charged for being accomplices in helping criminal activity since they would have no way of knowing whether the money they were exchanging was from illegal activity or not. They were also based in Florida AFAIK. Here is an article from Coindesk about the arrests and shut down. |
|
|
|
|
SSD is much faster than an HDD. Since it doesn't have any moving parts at all, I would think that it is more durable than an HDD. What do you mean that your HDD is more durable than an SSD? Have you tested two before?
|
|
|
|
|
Can you give us a screenshot and transaction id of your transaction?
|
|
|
|
Although it is a long time away, who will confirm transactions when mining ceases?
You've confused mining and the mining reward. The mining reward itself will stop around 2140. As others said, by that point, the transaction fees hopefully will be able to cover the mining reward and reward the miners. Mining itself does not stop when the reward stops, it will continue provided that the miners still receive a reward. |
|
|
|
|
I think coinut also has what you are looking for.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you can use those with purse.io. You would use them with your amazon account and buy stuff for other people in exchange for Bitcoin.
You can also go to localbitcoins or the currency exchange section and sell the gift cards to other people in exchange for Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think you can have incoming connections over tor, only outgoing connections.
You don't need to open port 8333. You only need it if you want incoming connections, which is not necessary. You only need outgoing connections for it to work.
|
|
|
|
How did this end up approved and released by the store?
Because no app is approved or verified on the play store. On the first report of an abuse or something like that Google will take a closer look first before it removes. Google (and apple for that matter) will check apps so that they fit their T&C and are not viruses. They can't really do much else to verify whether an app is scamming or a fake since that is hard to determine automatically. Doing that needs a person to check the apps, and they don't have enough time or people for that. |
|
|
|
|
They are having a Scaling Bitcoin conference in Hong Kong in December, but the likelihood of anything actually being done an consensus being reached is pretty low. I think part of the problems is that of the current proposals, only a few of them have actual implementations of what they are proposing.
|
|
|
|
i think 6 confirmations is enough to get sure about transactions that is 1BTC+.
On other hand 3 confirmations is enough for lower amount of BTCs.
Yes these are the best way of getting your bitcoin transaction most securely. But 6confirmation or 3 confirmations are best suited only with latest bitcoin core client only. If you use old bitcoin-qt client then you must wait for some 30 confirmations. This applies to SPV clients too. They trust the miners without verifying the validity of the blocks. When pools are SPV mining, they don't check the validity of the block and whether it complies with the network. Those mining pools then generate invalid blocks which get invalidated by Bitcoin core 0.10+ but not anything below or on 0.9.4 or earlier as those Core clients are not aware of the new rules. AFAIK, this isn't a threat right now. Majority of pools are mining on correct rules and creating valid blocks. Which also mean it does not mean if some wallets are outdated and accept some invalid blocks, the network itself will reject it, because most hashrate is pointed at the right wallet version. Still too bad but not a threat. There was a change in block rules after Core version 0.9.5. Clients before that version would accept those blocks blindly so will those using SPV clients. Clients after and on that version will reject the block as invalid as it doesn't follow the rules and refuse to relay it. A miner generated a block that doesn't follow the rule and miners that verify the blocks do not consider it as valid but those who have SPV mining on will continue mining on that chain and SPV client will follow the longest chain and accept it as valid. This was a threat for merchants accepting 1 confirmation transactions but there wasn't any attack at that time. This can happen with any soft-fork, but it only happened once in July when BIP 66 activated. It is possible that that fork issue could happen again if there is another soft-fork where miners don't upgrade and are spv mining, but hopefully they all learned their lesson. |
|
|
|
Why this thread is in the meta section  ? #reported. Is this a suitable spot? Or should it go under technical discussions? Thank you. (If you feel I put a topic in the wrong place, feel free to PM me instead of reporting straight to the moderators, they have enough work to do, don't give them extra work when you can just ask me to move it and... I will!) Service discussions, but it has already moved (blockchain.info is a service, NOT THE BLOCKCHAIN!!!) Back to topic: It is highly likely that some of the transactions to or from that address were malleated transactions. This means that two transactions with two txids but have THE SAME INPUTS AND OUTPUTS (meaning that no coin could be stolen) were created and sent. They will register as double spends since there are two txids that spend the same inputs, even though the outputs are also the same. This is possibly a result of the recent transaction mealleability attack or that your client created transactions with the now non-standard High S signatures and was malleated by someone to become the now standard Low S signature. |
|
|
|
When i started to use Bitcoin i had a similar question. Someone told me that 7 confirmation is a must, but better when you wait until it has 20 confirmation as minimum.
7 is a bit too much. 20 is super overkill. 20 is completely unnecessary in most cases. Of course, there are exceptions like when there was a major fork back in July. But that is easily remedied by keeping your software up to date. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin trading isn't really like trading stocks and such. In order to make money with Bitcoin through trading, as others have said above, you need a large amount of Bitcoin. A better and easier way to make money through Bitcoin is to do work. People will hire others for all kinds of work, and you can find those in the marketplace.
|
|
|
|
If it is centralized, then those important things in its production can be changed. The decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that every node will make sure that every block follows the rules and don't change the rules of production. But if it is centralized, then that means that some central authority sets the rules and tells everyone else what the rules are, even if they don't like the rules. With decentralization, if I don't like the rules, I can change them or go with the old ones. With centralization, someones says "these are the rules and that's that" and no one else can change that. So that means that the central authority can change the rules at their own whim and everyone that uses their coin has to follow.
Thanks for the comment. I agree with you that this might be possible. I have a question for you. Is this situation you mentioned in your comment possible for bitcoin? If the answer can be yes and bitcoin can be manipulated you will not have more faith in it. You have faith in it because you are sure that it CANNOT be manipulated. I am asking for this kind of coin. That CANNOT be manipulated. That's why I write in my main post: "This kind of coin, like bitcoin, is protected from the manipulation (from everyone and everything) from the technology which will produce it. In other words, no one can change its production (amount, time between amounts, its flow in the market). So no one can change these essential things that can make possible its manipulation."Do you have to make any comments having in mind THIS kind of digital coin? Why this KIND of digital coin must not have the same status as bitcoin? In my mind, a centralized coin is one where the miners are owned by one entity, the software is developed by that same entity, and the software is closed source. In this way, should that entity decide to change the rules, they release an update, send an alert informing all users that they need to upgrade. Since the software is closed source, they can pull the old binaries and then no one can downgrade unless they saved an old version. Even using an old version would block them from the rest of the network, so those on old versions can no longer do anything. Also since it is closed source, no one (except the entity) can know what exactly goes into the mining algorithm, so that people outside cannot mine. Or they are like some PoS coins where blocks are only valid if they are signed by a select group of people. This makes it so that the users of that coin have no say about anything regarding the coin, and thus people (here) don't like it. Good but we are at the same point like before.  I am asking about another kind of creation of the digital coin not like you mention in your second post. The not possible manipulated one. It is for that that I need your opinion. IF this kind of coin exist AND IS CENTRALIZED (from an technology that CANNOT be manipulated) what it will be your behavior? So, forget for the moment your meaning in your mind for the centralized coin and imagine this one given by me. You will like and accept it like bitcoin? Such a coin cannot exist. A clone of bitcoin, by nature, is decentralized. Even with centralized development of a bitcoin clone, it isn't centralized. People can clone the software and essentially fork that coin away from the centralized developers, so it isn't centralized. You need to define what makes that coin centralized. |
|
|
|
|
Man these satoshi topics are really annoying.
What happened? No one fucking knows. STOP ASKING! YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO FIND OUT!!! He just vanished, disappeared without a trace.
If you want a thread about satoshi, just look around the forum and you found THOUSANDS of speculation threads about Satoshi. They are completely absolute spam for sig campaign posters.
So shut up about it!
|
|
|
|
If it is centralized, then those important things in its production can be changed. The decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that every node will make sure that every block follows the rules and don't change the rules of production. But if it is centralized, then that means that some central authority sets the rules and tells everyone else what the rules are, even if they don't like the rules. With decentralization, if I don't like the rules, I can change them or go with the old ones. With centralization, someones says "these are the rules and that's that" and no one else can change that. So that means that the central authority can change the rules at their own whim and everyone that uses their coin has to follow.
Thanks for the comment. I agree with you that this might be possible. I have a question for you. Is this situation you mentioned in your comment possible for bitcoin? If the answer can be yes and bitcoin can be manipulated you will not have more faith in it. You have faith in it because you are sure that it CANNOT be manipulated. I am asking for this kind of coin. That CANNOT be manipulated. That's why I write in my main post: "This kind of coin, like bitcoin, is protected from the manipulation (from everyone and everything) from the technology which will produce it. In other words, no one can change its production (amount, time between amounts, its flow in the market). So no one can change these essential things that can make possible its manipulation."Do you have to make any comments having in mind THIS kind of digital coin? Why this KIND of digital coin must not have the same status as bitcoin? In my mind, a centralized coin is one where the miners are owned by one entity, the software is developed by that same entity, and the software is closed source. In this way, should that entity decide to change the rules, they release an update, send an alert informing all users that they need to upgrade. Since the software is closed source, they can pull the old binaries and then no one can downgrade unless they saved an old version. Even using an old version would block them from the rest of the network, so those on old versions can no longer do anything. Also since it is closed source, no one (except the entity) can know what exactly goes into the mining algorithm, so that people outside cannot mine. Or they are like some PoS coins where blocks are only valid if they are signed by a select group of people. This makes it so that the users of that coin have no say about anything regarding the coin, and thus people (here) don't like it. |
|
|
|
|
Please don't necropost. Usually necroposts are completely useless and are only there to spam so that people get their sig ad payment. Don't do it, you will probably be considered a spammer.
|
|
|
|
|
6 confirmations is super safe, and is also a completely arbitrary number that the core devs came up with several years ago. In reality, you only need 1 confirmation to be relatively safe and 3 for large transactions just to be sure. In most cases, you can accept unconfirmed transactions, although with those, you should check the fee and for any dust outputs just to make sure that it will get confirmed.
|
|
|
|
You can sell it and sell at a loss, before no one even will exchange that coin. Or you can try to revive the coin. Or just put them away somewhere and hope that it comes back to life. Or you can just forget about them and admit that you lost a gamble. Even better, don't invest in those coins at all  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
