It’s no unwritten rule.. It’s pretty simple, if the campaign does not say “no alts allowed”, then Alts ARE allowed.. No tag.. If yahoo forgot to insert the rule that’s his fault.. Edit: Holy shit this happened in 2017?? What are you doing? Digging for dirt on this legendary(s) specifically, or just looking for anything, even ancient, to tag users for? Does the campaign have a rule against enrolling multiple accounts?
If not, no problem..
There was no special rule for Alt accounts but there were other participants also enrolling Alt Accounts and they got a negative Trust from the Bounty Manager (someone I would consider one of the most reliable managers here) for enrolling Alts in that campaign. Edit: Campaign was Byteball Signature Camapaign managed by yahoo62278: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1760807.0Yahoo tagged others for breaking a rule that wasn’t even a rule? He should remove those tags.. |
|
|
|
|
Does the campaign have a rule against enrolling multiple accounts?
If not, no problem..
Users get red trust for it for breaking campaign rules, not simply for having multiple accounts in one campaign..
|
|
|
|
|
I’m not getting the vax and I don’t buy the variants story..
Too convenient of an excuse to control..
It’s all too Orwellian for me, givin all the crazy shit going on in the world from the last us election to all the latest blatant pushing of propaganda including the normalizing of incredible degeneracy and the attempts to destroy western culture/people’s..
Nope I don’t trust a damn think any sort of media or authority says or wants me to do..
All in Bitcoin HODL..
Has quite nice advantages for things such as, say, disappearing somewhere else across the globe once the west becomes completely uninhabitable for someone like me..
I don’t have much confidence in the USA anymore, in the continuance of freedom and liberty there or just about anywhere else in the west..
If things keep going like this it’s gonna be abandon ship..
|
|
|
|
|
If they could outhash and destroy Bitcoin any other crypto would be a walk in the park to destroy next..
It would also destroy the confidence in all/any other crypto..
You don’t think the government would go to extreme lengths to secure their monopoly on printing/issuing money, with the full backing of banks?
I see hardly anyone is interested in protecting Bitcoin from governments anymore, but rather keeping it in compliance with regulations..
When on-chain KYC?
|
|
|
|
It’s ‘entirely possible’ vaccine campaigns ‘will be used for massive-scale depopulation’: Former Pfizer VP PLEASE warn every person not to go near top up vaccines. There is absolutely no need to them...If someone wished to harm or kill a significant proportion of the world’s population over the next few years, the systems being put in place right now will enable it. It’s my considered view that it is entirely possible that this will be used for massive-scale depopulation', Dr Mike Yeadon told the American Frontline Doctors Dr. Yeadon said: “I’m well aware of the global crimes against humanity being perpetrated against a large proportion of the world’s population. “I feel great fear, but I’m not deterred from giving expert testimony to multiple groups of able lawyers like Rocco Galati in Canada and Reiner Fuellmich in Germany. “I have absolutely no doubt that we are in the presence of evil (not a determination I’ve ever made before in a 40-year research career) and dangerous products. “In the U.K., it’s abundantly clear that the authorities are bent on a course which will result in administering ‘vaccines’ to as many of the population as they can. This is madness, because even if these agents were legitimate, protection is needed only by those at notably elevated risk of death from the virus. In those people, there might even be an argument that the risks are worth bearing. And there definitely are risks which are what I call ‘mechanistic’: inbuilt in the way they work. “But all the other people, those in good health and younger than 60 years, perhaps a little older, they don’t perish from the virus. In this large group, it’s wholly unethical to administer something novel and for which the potential for unwanted effects after a few months is completely uncharacterized. “In no other era would it be wise to do what is stated as the intention. “Since I know this with certainty, and I know those driving it know this too, we have to enquire: What is their motive? “While I don’t know, I have strong theoretical answers, only one of which relates to money and that motive doesn’t work, because the same quantum can be arrived at by doubling the unit cost and giving the agent to half as many people. Dilemma solved. So it’s something else. Appreciating that, by entire population, it is also intended that minor children and eventually babies are to be included in the net, and that’s what I interpret to be an evil act. “There is no medical rationale for it. Knowing as I do that the design of these ‘vaccines’ results, in the expression in the bodies of recipients, expression of the spike protein, which has adverse biological effects of its own which, in some people, are harmful (initiating blood coagulation and activating the immune ‘complement system’), I’m determined to point out that those not at risk from this virus should not be exposed to the risk of unwanted effects from these agents.” https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/former-pfizer-vp-to-aflds-entirely-possible-this-will-be-used-for-massive-scale-depopulationFormer Pfizer VP: ‘Your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death.’ Look out the window, and think, “why is my government lying to me about something so fundamental?” Because, I think the answer is, they are going to kill you using this method. They’re going to kill you and your family.’ He addressed the “demonstrably false” propaganda from governments in response to COVID-19, including the “lie” of dangerous variants, the totalitarian potential for “vaccine passports,” and the strong possibility we are dealing with a “conspiracy” which could lead to something far beyond the carnage experienced in the wars and massacres of the 20th century His main points included: There is “no possibility” current variants of COVID-19 will escape immunity. It is “just a lie.” Yet, governments around the world are repeating this lie, indicating that we are witnessing not just “convergent opportunism,” but a “conspiracy.” Meanwhile media outlets and Big Tech platforms are committed to the same propaganda and the censorship of the truth. Pharmaceutical companies have already begun to develop unneeded “top-up” (“booster”) vaccines for the “variants.” The companies are planning to manufacture billions of vials, in addition to the current experimental COVID-19 “vaccine” campaign. Regulatory agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, have announced that since these “top-up” vaccines will be so similar to the prior injections which were approved for emergency use authorization, drug companies will not be required to “perform any clinical safety studies.” Thus, this virtually means that design and implementation of repeated and coerced mRNA vaccines “go from the computer screen of a pharmaceutical company into the arms of hundreds of millions of people, [injecting] some superfluous genetic sequence for which there is absolutely no need or justification.” Why are they doing this? Since no benign reason is apparent, the use of vaccine passports along with a “banking reset” could issue in a totalitarianism unlike the world has ever seen. Recalling the evil of Stalin, Mao, and Hitler, “mass depopulation” remains a logical outcome. The fact that this at least could be true means everyone must “fight like crazy to make sure that system never forms.” “And if you wanted to introduce a characteristic which could be harmful and could even be lethal, and you can even tune it to say ‘let’s put it in some gene that will cause liver injury over a nine-month period,’ or, cause your kidneys to fail but not until you encounter this kind of organism [that would be quite possible]. Biotechnology provides you with limitless ways, frankly, to injure or kill billions of people. “And since I can’t think of a benign explanation for any of the steps: variants, top-up vaccines, no regulatory studies… it’s not only that I cannot think of a benign explanation, the steps described, and the scenario described, and the necessary sort of resolution to this false problem is going to allow what I just described: unknown, and unnecessary gene sequences injected into the arms of potentially billions of people for no reason. “I’m very worried … that pathway will be used for mass depopulation, because I can’t think of any benign explanation.” “The most different variant is only 0.3% different from the original sequence as emailed out of Wuhan in … January 2020. 0.3% [is] the one [variant] that is the most different on the planet so far. And now another way of saying it is, ‘all of the variants are not less than 99.7% identical to each other.’ “Now, you might be thinking, ‘hmm, .3%, is that enough [to escape immunity and become more dangerous]?’ The answer is no. And, so, the idea that 0.3% could even have a chance of getting around immunity is just a lie. It’s not [even] like an opinion difference. “I don’t think 3% would be enough. That’s 10 times more variation than has occurred in 16 months [with this virus]. I don’t even think 30% difference would be enough. So, I’m saying that 100 times more variation than has actually happened, would still leave me putting a big bet on the human immune system not being fooled that these are new pathogens. “I’ve chatted this over with several professors of immunology and they agreed with me, it’s like, ‘why are you asking me this?’ https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-former-pfizer-vp-your-government-is-lying-to-you-in-a-way-that-could-lead-to-your-deathI wasn’t going to get the jab anyway but this is quite a read.. |
|
|
|
One thing I've earned about regulations and laws is that when you start making things complicated with hundreds of them it's the bad guys that manage to avoid them and get the upper hand.
Same here, one guy finding a weakness, and the "good" guys are screwed.
When laws become tyrannical the “good guys” become criminals.. What does that matter? We may have to become criminals to use and sustain Bitcoin.. Good thing the entire point of Bitcoin is to be unstoppable and unregulatable no matter what silly laws they make.. Being a “good guy” has little to nothing to do with obeying laws.. The whole point of Bitcoin is to take power away from governments.. In 2013 we didn’t have the powerful ASICS we do now.. Neither did governments/attackers.. Our miners need to be able to beat the next top 10 most powerful governments combined to keep Bitcoin secure.. That’s why it’s not about electricity, it’s about hashrate.. |
|
|
|
But that energy is not available. It would cost a blackout in significant share the country. And the united states is not a dictatorship, but a democracy.
First of all, nobody would allow such a blackout for a day in a democracy which would have very severe consequences(people dying in hospitals for example and billions of usd lost in the economy, )
Even if that could happen, There are responsibilities, accountability and other tools which certainly would be used against someone who was responsible for a blackout like that. Certainly many powerful people would he removed from the administration . For what, 50btc?
Think manhattan project energy.. No, not to make 50btc or even 5,000,000 BTC.. Their goal would be to DESTROY BTC.. Even if your plan would work things will simply change, instead of constantly deploying 160Exahash of hashing power miners will afford to deploy 800Exa for 2 minutes, in the end consuming the same amount of power and getting the same reward.
Yes, miners would eventually get back to the limits of their efficiency in their competition.. If BTC was running at 800exa rather than 160exa, it would be incredibly more secure against government attack, would it not? Yes mining decentralization of the hash is key to its security, but the amount of hash in the hands of the “good guys” matters too.. The more hash running on Bitcoin in decentralized hands of good guys, the more secure it is against government attacks.. At 8 minutes somehow generate random number (possibly use last/nearest tx broadcast closest to 8 minute mark as the random number?)..
How do you determine it (last/nearest tx broadcast closest to 8 minute mark)? Each mempool is unique and there's delay on transaction propagation, which means each node will have different transaction used as random number. Additionally, how do other node (which was offline or running for first time) verify the random number is valid number? I don’t know.. Do you have any ideas? |
|
|
|
PoW power consumption is what makes bitcoin secure. IMO there is no problem to solve here. There is big propaganda made by altcoins criticizing bitcoin TPS and energy consumption... You are basically staking energy, which is something from outside the blockchain, something valuable in our world and society as we know it. This is one thing that gives value to bitcoin. (the opposite of staking coins, which you are staking something from within the blockchain itself) Bitcoin is not wasting energy to generate blocks, it is using energy to create value and utility. Miners also mine in places where energy is cheap, and those places are usually where the generation of eletric energy is bigger than the consumption. I saw just now this video from Antonopoulos where he explains that it is easy to bash bitcoin energy consumption, because it is transparent. But you cannot see how much energy banks consome (with buildings, bureaucracy, security, guards, etc) I would contend that the security comes from sheer computing power/hashrate rather than how much energy is used to run the computing power.. It’s “the next 500 supercomputers in the world can’t compete”, not “the next 500 power plants in the world can’t compete”.. (Probably much more than 500 since this saying was a thing, and it’s never been about how much electricity it would take) If the NSA wanted to 51 Bitcoin, do you really think they would care how much electricity it took? Neh, they can make plenty of energy.. They have the energy, what they don’t have is the hashrate/processing power.. It would only take about 1 day to 51 Bitcoin, and they could use an entire nuclear power plant, or 10.. The cost of burning that energy for one day is nothing compared to the cost of burning that energy 24/7 to KEEP it secure.. Energy doesn’t matter, it’s the hashrate that keeps Bitcoin secure, because they don’t have the hashrate to compete no matter how much energy they have/use.. Bitcoin could keep the same hashrate and use less energy, by only hashing in bursts, thus allowing miners to buy even MORE hashrate with their savings, and even put all of the old currently inefficient miners hashrate back online to increase hashrate, because it would be profitable again.. Might even make CPU mining profitable again until hashrate grew to make it a competition of efficiency again.. Would incentivize a massive amount more hashrate and INCREASE DECENTRALIZATION to higher energy cost areas.. Mining on almost anything would become profitable until hashrate atleast tripled.. Hashrate would go through the roof.. And thus also security.. You don't need to generate random numbers or anything crazy like that, it can be done by changing how next target is computed by using different number of previous blocks to get the time. For example "If last block was mined in 2 minutes, reduce difficulty by 80%; Else set difficulty as it should be based on past 2016 blocks". Roughly similar to what we are doing in testnet but only when the time between blocks are 20 minutes.
Here are two major problems with the idea:
1. As it was mentioned above, there is no universal clock in the decentralized network that determines "what time it is". Your node may say it is 14:05, my node says it is 14:30 and another can say it is 15:00. That's why we take the average of all times we get from the peers.
2. When you reduce the difficulty, the hashrate doesn't go away. It is still there and when the difficulty is reduced by 80% that massive hashrate can find the next block in an instance. Now we are facing an easy to perform 51% attack.
If you want blocks/solutions found in 2 minutes you adjust difficulty so on average a block/solution would be found in 2 minutes with full current hashrate right? It’s hashrate vs hashrate.. I don’t see how reducing the block time to find a hash faster would somehow give a minority hashrate(pool/attacker) any advantage.. They would still need 51%.. Ok, average of node clocks having passed 8 minutes of idle time before the 2 minute hashing session begins (with difficulty set to take an average of 2 minutes for X hashrate to solve a block solution) I think you would still need a random number published after the 8 minute idle time hashed into the next block to PROVE that the miners only starter hashing after the 8 minute idle time is up, or they would just mine the entire time and hold the solved block until after the 8 minute idle time, in which a cheater could 51.. The point of the random is to MAKE them wait the 8 minutes before they started hashing, or they would be hashing for nothing, because without including the random number (starting pistol shot), their block would be invalid. I’m still talking 10 minute block times, but instead of hashing for all 10 minutes of every block, a random number could be released after 8 minutes, like a starting pistol shot, for a 2 minute hashing sprint at the end of every 10 minutes.. Their solution would have to include the random to prove they started after the 8 minute idle.. 8 minute idle-release random after the 8-2 minute hashing sprint (difficulty adjusted to find solution in 2 minutes)-block still found/added in 10 minute increments Would probably also reduce the variation in actual seen blocktime too.. Variation in shorter block times is less (I imagine it’s likely a percentage), and would still only have blocks every 10 minutes on average to keep the blockchain a manageable size (decentralization).. This won't work.
At 8 minutes somehow generate random number (possibly use last/nearest tx broadcast closest to 8 minute mark as the random number?).
Next block must be solved including hash of last block and random number generated to prove work started after the 8 minute mark since last block solved.
Who determines what the random number is? Transactions are not timestamped when they are broadcast, and there is nothing to stop a miner from broadcasting their own transaction 8 minutes after the prior block was found. Also, block timestamps are not the exact time a block was found, it can have up to a two hour variance, so it is possible for block n to have a later timestamp than block n + 1. Still requires the same amount of computing power giving same security, but miners only run for 2 minutes out of every 10 minutes instead of constantly..
Reduces power consumption by 80%.. It takes time to shut down a miner, and to start a miner. The power savings would not quite be 80% under perfect circumstances. I think this would encourage miners to backdate (or back time) found blocks, and withhold the blocks until the next block is broadcast, creating many orphans. I do find this to be a valid point.. I’m not a code genius.. How could a starting pistol shot random number be programmed to be broadcast after an about 8 minute idle period to start the 2 minute hashing sprint? Thus proving they didn’t start hashing until the idle period was over.. The way I’m imagining it, until this random number was broadcast after the idle period, they wouldn’t even have anything to work/hash on, because they don’t yet have all of the information they need to create a valid block at all.. Nodes would reach a consensus as to what this random number is after the idle break, and not accept a block that did not include it the random number.. Block would be invalid without it.. Somehow.. |
|
|
|
|
Reduce difficulty to target block time of 2 minutes..
After block solved nodes start timer to 8 minutes..
At 8 minutes somehow generate random number (possibly use last/nearest tx broadcast closest to 8 minute mark as the random number?)..
Next block must be solved including hash of last block and random number generated to prove work started after the 8 minute mark since last block solved..
Still requires the same amount of computing power giving same security, but miners only run for 2 minutes out of every 10 minutes instead of constantly..
Reduces power consumption by 80%..
Have any ideas like this came up to run POW security in bursts rather than constantly?
Could it possibly make BTC even MORE secure because miners would be able to spend that 80% power savings on more ASICS rather than spending it in electricity?
This would greatly increase the profitability of mining, not paying so much electricity, and create even more of a race for more hashpower, no?
Would probably even make mining profitable even at high electricity costs until 500% more hashrate came online to compete..
The value of miners, even old inefficient miners, would skyrocket? (Basically all miners would see an efficiency increase of 500%?)
Could insanely increase hashrate and hence security?
|
|
|
|
Aww yiss, motherfucking free markets!!!
A big part of why NFT's exist is specifically to enable stuff like this-- money pass transactions, illiquid trades booked at arbitrary values, etc. This crap about art is really 90% cover for money laundering, graft, and pump and dumps.
Sure, it might be fun to spend a couple bucks on a digital title to some art, but the millions (even hundreds of millions)-- being directed at NFTs is driven by motivations far less simple and clean.
Do you suppose that this doesn’t occur with physical artworks? I reasonably suspect that it is the primary purpose of “modern art”, which requires zero talent to create: - Have a brooding bipolar “artist” smear some random blobs of paint on a canvas—or throw some junk in a bin—or take a photograph of a urinal, or whatever.
- Pronouce it “modern art”.
- “Sell” it for $10 million between parties who want to transfer $10 million for other reasons.
If anybody ever questions this: “You are unsophisticated. You do not understand art.” I point this out, because I disagree with the FUD with NFTs. It is similar to the FUD with Bitcoin and so-called “money laundering”. See also my prior post about this, which nutildah ripped off. Yes, I have no doubt that Bitcoin is sometimes used for “money laundering”. Far more “money laundering” is done with bags of cash, shell corporations, layering with front businesses, and most of all, insider connections at big banks (HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, ...). Are you an old-school organized crime boss with a hundred million dollars to clean in a hurry? You don’t use Bitcoin for that! Instead, you call your banker. Yes, artwork NFTs will probably be used for some “money laundering”. But it will be a drop in the bucket compared to the monkey-business that already must exist in the art world. Please, let us not ruin a good thing with Four Horsemen of the Cryptocalypse type of fearmongering. Bitcoiners should know better than that! Money laundering is bad mmkay.. Right? Straight to hell with those evil pricks for trying to hide their wealth from their totally not tyrannical governments.. Burn em at the stake.. |
|
|
|
Quicksy’s fNFT will moon such much more than yours will.
I bought the wrong one again? My luck.. I also jumped before watching for the market to take shape. Hey, eddie, I want to offer to trade you my mprep-III for your lower-numbered eddie13-I plus 100 fBTC. Although a low-numbered Global Moderator is very valuable, an eddie is nothing to sneeze at; and there is only one eddie13-I! I do speculate that lower-numbered fNFTs will attain higher valuations as the market develops. Alas, there does not seem to be any way for lusers to transfer fNFTs (or fake-BTC) directly to each other. @thermos, please add this feature ASAP! Restricting the manner in which fNFTs can be traded or transferred seems incompatible with your free-market principles, yes?
I just bought Quickseller-VI for 1 BTC ... Someone was engaged in an unsuccessful illegal sale. LOL
Congratulations on buying a piece of history from one of the best forum members the forum has ever seen (it is on the internet, so it has to be true). Well played.
Not only that, suchmoon gave theymos a golden shower to the tune of 19 merits (in-spite theymos' repeated requests that users don't send merits their way) which shows how gullible suchmoon is that this is a real thing in their eyes.
suchmoon is a merit source. Her merit-sending criteria would differ, if she needed to earn those sMerits. Trade? Sure how? I’m also quite into golden showers so y’all feel free to PM me on that too.. Biological females only #superstraight |
|
|
|
farmed accounts like old times
Didn't take long...  Crikey. You are not even capable of letting an April Fools’ thread go unspoilt by your obsessive personal grudges, psychotic fantasies, and accusations based on no evidence. Quicksy’s fNFT will moon such much more than yours will. I bought the wrong one again? My luck.. |
|
|
|
|
I’ve been hotels all but about 15-18 nights this year so far in 2021..
Anyone want to buy rooms booked with my points for BTC? Heh..
Flying today and my hotel where I’m landing has a roof top pool.. About 80F there..
I can’t wait..
Probably be there 1-3 weeks..
|
|
|
|
Fast Forward to 2021 when most think NFTs on ethereum are the bomb dot com. Rarepepes still reaching all time highs. NFTs on Bitcoin blockchain are immutable.
If any company was SERIOUS about issuing NFTs they would be doing them in Bitcoin and not on flakey ETH.. |
|
|
|
125 BTCIt's actually >10x as much.
I had a premonition the other day that some of these funds may be used to take 1st amendment battles to the Supreme Court some day.. Depending on where the way of the world goes, and how strictly theymos/this forum intend to hold on to the fundamental principles of its founding, bitcointalk could end up as a big player in future battles for liberty.. Maybe after another halving or 2.. Either that or this forum is eventually going to have to bow to the authoritarians, or seek safer refuge than the USA.. |
|
|
|
I also don't like leaving a positive for someone unless there's a damn good reason, and a wrongly-left negative--even though it's not right--doesn't rise to that level IMO.
This is the problem.. I completely disagree.. Negative ratings have MUCH more effect than positive ratings.. A single negative rating can have drastic consequences while even a handful of positives doesn't mean much.. Petty scams are nowhere near as much of a problem as is good users getting chased off the forum by bullshit negative feedback and surrounding drama.. I think some people just like to use the trust system too much period.. Users searching around ALL DAY trying to find reasons to leave ratings.. (mostly negative) People aren’t perfect.. Y’all are way too harsh a lot of the time with the negatives.. Positive should be indicators of actually having done some sort of business/trade, risk or not.. Just having made successful trades is a good indicator that they aren’t here just trying to scam.. “Could scam” is about one of the most ridiculous things I read.. Do y’all not remember the ICO bubbles that happened around the last pump? And your so worried about petty scams? What about the billions of dollars they scammed, and everyone is worried about $100 here and there.. It’s all so tiring (trust system drama), and this forum is so low IQ anymore from so many good users being chased away by neg tag fiends, just don’t know.. One thing this quote might have a point about, placing so much trust and control in the hands of 3rd world newb neg tag fiends might not be such a good idea.. Could be possible many DT care about their power and capacity to control others a lot more than they care about the principles of Bitcoin.. Really wonder about some people’s ultimate motives sometimes.. Why spend all day chasing a bunch of worthless alt accounts that are ripping off a scam ICO/IPO/spam campaign? I don't get it.. It’s just enabling the scam that itself is to incompetent to keep from getting ripped off by the lowest IQ dregs in existence.. Sending a thousand negs to bottom of the barrel leeches makes one very trustworthy and worthy of a leadership roll somehow though.. Counter ratings? Who cares.. Have fun playing the game.. |
|
|
|
|
Can’t be..
Look at all the positive trust he has for althunting.. No way he would scam..
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin had NFTs for about a decade. They're called colored coins. There was even a collectible card game created. What am I missing. Why are people thinking NFTs are new? We have been doing this with counterparty on the Bitcoin blockchain like forever.. Look at the transaction on my profile address.. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
