How would you change it? I saw a proposal for a non-outsourceable PoW "challenge", but I'm not sure about its implementability as part of Bitcoin with a hardfork.

In my opinion, ALL engineering notation prefixes should be fair game. I should be able to talk about milliBTC, or microBTC.
BTC and mBTC are used for purchases, while μBTC can be used to discuss fees.


nanoBTC is not of much use. When talking about the network as a whole, it could be worthwhile to discuss kilo- or mega-BTC.

Some altcoin could have a use for kiloFOO, or even megaFOO for transactions themselves.

NOBODY is chatting you over facebook. If you want a loan, you deal with it HERE, either via PM or via the forum post.

Also, how can we be sure that you won't scam us? Your promising that you won't isn't enough.

Did you happen to use a brainwallet or import some "sample" private key from some website?

Yes, but why does the passphrase need to be sent over the network? Why not just send addresses, and then sign transactions locally on the browser in Javascript? There is absolutely no reason for information that directly calculates private keys to be sent over a network. Either calculate everything locally and send only non-secret data such as signed transactions, inbound transaction info, public keys, balances, etc, OR store private data on the server and have the client authorize itself to ACCESS that data.

At this point, saying that you are not technical is not an excuse. I'd love to hear from your developers as to why this behavior is as it is.

You have not addressed the issue of sending the passphrase over an internet connection when you claim to take the benefits of online and offline wallets.

Is this a fork of bitcoind/bitcoin-qt? Or an implementation from scratch?

No, this provides no security of an offline wallet. You could spend our coins as you wish, if you wanted to, as you know the passphrase. I logged in with my passphrase being "passphrase" and saw the following:



Suspicious, to say the least.

Where does 3-10% daily interest come from, then?

This seems a bit too good to be true. I'm interested in seeing observably existent technical measures that safeguard coins, as well as some sort of proof that this is not a pyramid scheme.

Would you prefer 333.33 testnet coins, or a slip of paper with a random QR code that claims to have 333.33 BTC on mainnet?

Reasonable communication after misunderstanding due to crowdfund in lending. Negative rating retracted.

Can't tell if you're serious.

An altcoin like Litecoin and Dogecoin that the lender considers stable enough to offset risk.

Not all users agree on how collateral should be handled; due to the pseudanonymous + no-chargeback nature of bitcoin which has never been seen, nobody knows the optimal parameters yet. Some believe it should cover less, such as 70%, while others may forgo it.

Instead of posting screenshots, a txid would allow independent verification and requires less bandwidth for readers.

The same error? You need to replace /foo/bar/node.py with the correct path in ALL of my replies on this topic. I was using that as an example path.

As I said in my previous post, you will need to update that path to reflect the actual location of the script.

No more than 5, assuming you did it all correctly, and running directly updates the page correctly as well.

OK, so do you have the script saved somewhere and made executable? Let's imagine that it's located at /foo/bar/node.py. Obviously yours will be different.

First we need to allow your script to write to the status file without needing to be run as root. You will need to run:


This will allow your script to write to index.html to actually update it.

I assume that you are familiar a terminal-based editor (vim or nano). Run


and add the following line to the file that you see:


Save and quit. Your crontab will have been applied and the script will run every 5 minutes, assuming the system is booted up (not necessarily logged in as you).

If this seems a bit convoluted to you, I can remotely set this up for BTC0.015.

Isn't your thread title also a bit attention-seeking?

Actually, no, I would agree that your actions so far only reflect badly on you. This crowdfund, your "professional language", and retaliatory trust. Instead of removing the improper trust feedback you sent, I would have just not added it in the first place.

You are a full member, I would expect that you know the rules here. Unfortunately, as you've shown, you either don't, or you disregard them.