@shorena seems like blockchain.info new wallet finally added a sign/verify message feature. link here. the option is not available on addresses generated by the new wallet though. only the imported ones. |
|
|
|
|
all kinds of people use bitcoins. now stop with the stupid threads.
|
|
|
|
It's very simple.
Collect from the faucet, bet x25 if you get it do x25 again and withdraw.
Problem is it takes forever. But for those with no life (like me) this might be enough to let say jump start a BTC faucet.
a lot people have been doing this ever since PD introduced their faucet. few people got lucky while most of the others ended up not earning enough for wasting their time. |
|
|
|
If someone says that I will pay you 0.01 per tweet and the rules are that the maximum number of tweet is 8 so in total it is 0.08BTC but in the title it is advertised that you can earn up to 0.1BTC which is not true, is this counted as a scam because he is advertising that you can earn up to 0.1 when in fact you can't (there is no bonus which can reach 0.1).
Would like to hear from you guys what do you think and lock the topic after i get some opinions from you.
*This is an similar scenario like an actual promotion thread here in forum
if the limit of 8 tweets are stated clearly then no IMO. people can see that as a mistake or dishonesty, but it's not something that I'd call a scam. What if i have warn him many times about the title and he don't respond or ignores me, the maximum number is mentioned clearly but when you calculate the maximum of amount of bitcoins is not as advertised on the thread title. then that would deserve him/her a neutral feedback at least. unwillingness to correct the mistake is not a trait of a trusted person. I wouldn't leave a negative feedback for something trivial like that. though depending on the other party's personality and past deals, I just might. |
|
|
|
If someone says that I will pay you 0.01 per tweet and the rules are that the maximum number of tweet is 8 so in total it is 0.08BTC but in the title it is advertised that you can earn up to 0.1BTC which is not true, is this counted as a scam because he is advertising that you can earn up to 0.1 when in fact you can't (there is no bonus which can reach 0.1).
Would like to hear from you guys what do you think and lock the topic after i get some opinions from you.
*This is an similar scenario like an actual promotion thread here in forum
if the limit of 8 tweets are stated clearly then no IMO. people can see that as a mistake or dishonesty, but it's not something that I'd call a scam. |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is BitSpenser from bitcointalk.org staking his bitcoin address on May 7, 2016.
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
1Lnw1y6ADhhSkXGS93XT3q5ftvkNPuwgwp
IENuTY2+wp6bCcBb6ssO3edSjkO82ta3Mj8AOmNZEJLyGeHJYvywMSkyoCULUv8j7xUfuhvlsy6JA9AEqeUtWLI=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
verified. |
|
|
|
I heard that as long as the transaction is on unconfirmed status the sender can manipulate it and get back the money.
is that true ?
it's called double spending. it's done by broadcasting another transaction and have it confirmed before the first one does. but nodes will reject transactions that have same input(s) as the one that is already on their mempool, so you'll need to wait for the majority of the network to drop the first transaction before broadcasting the second transaction. |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is mistercashking address, today is May 7th, 2016.
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
1Jct4NBYu3YHp9MngyWtid25m4b9qhuamT
H1R0biy67jYjG5kPK+jcg1X+f5MZ9KwZUTWr9zwd4QlRFc+AHndSNn0eC0SnTMStnRY+DtCb2Z0vAXPcj8dgBgE=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
. |
|
|
|
Still unclear how he fooled Gavin. Might there be a bug in Electrum's signed message verification code?
perhaps. gavin also said that they verified it on a brand new laptop. it is unclear if gavin knows for a fact that the laptop was indeed "brand new". of course gavin (plus the other 4(?) people) being fooled is not the only possibility. |
|
|
|
i downloaded the latest version of the wallet but my wallet shows synchronizing but the block count isnt changing. what am i doing wrong here? can someone help me?
I'm sure that your wallet is already showing the right block count by now but I'll answer it anyway just in case other users have same issue. the block count will update once you have downloaded all (or sometimes, most) of the blocks. and no, it's not dead. |
|
|
|
github clearly shows the dev is Clemahieu, not Wlemahieu. His name is Colin Lamahieu
https://github.com/wlemahieu/raiblocks.netraiblocks.net are mostly handled by wlemahieu. coding the wallet and other stuff goes to Colin. |
|
|
|
he has not yet supplied any information to public about his claim to be the real satoshi and he wants to move the coins in the following days!
what is next he is going to move coins from block 100s and say i am satoshi because i have early access!
he hasn't and he won't. if you take a bit of time and look around you'll find out that he did make promise to present an "extraordinary proof" which we never got. instead he backed down, pretty much said "sorry guys, I really am satoshi but I changed my mind so I won't give you any more proof" (that's my interpretation of it). |
|
|
|
Think about it - if you were purchasing a domain with your name in the title, why would you register it using an anonymous registrant to hide your name?
Forgot to tick-off default option "Protect my privacy for 5.99$ per year" maybe? That's one perfectly plausible explanation  It couldn't possibly be anything like My guess is wishful thinking. Never change, bitcointalk, never change...  not really sure where you're going with this. so you're saying that craig can deny his ties to the domain? what would that do? his claims on satoshi's identity were recorded in a video. |
|
|
|
it's owned by craig wright. Source? Or wishful thinking? it's his friggin' blog. where have you been all this time? No blog. just a dead landing page. Plausible deniability there's this thing we call archives? http://archive.is/eQwqr |
|
|
|
it's owned by craig wright. Source? Or wishful thinking? it's his friggin' blog. where have you been all this time? |
|
|
|
lmao this guy... he's still maintaining his claim on the satoshi identity while saying that he won't prove it because of various reasons. it's owned by craig wright. |
|
|
|
Any news about this project? looks like they are no plan to release it again.. also the faucet still not open.
Why people still trading on mrai market place.,.
Any update guys from devs?
I think it is ok that the trading continues even though the faucet is still close their should be active circulation of the active threads so that the enthusiasm still there this coin will be huge once it entered on exchanges I think we should give some more time to the Dev. This is a new ALT and it has completely different Idea and structure. So i just hope everything's will be fine and soon everything will back including the Mrai Faucet. i really dont understand with Mrai problems.... as far as i know, faucet is not connected with dev. the longer faucet offlines, more people's going to abandon this coin the faucet are run by one of the dev and is the only way of distribution. I really am not sure why they're taking so long to bring the faucet up though. they haven't said a word about it. |
|
|
|
|
lol. probably just an error on your end. not seeing anything like that here.
|
|
|
|
I wonder how would price of Bitcoin be affected if real Satoshi nakamoto comes out in public and prove beyond any doubt that he is real Satoshi.Would bitcoin price fall or would it rise very high?
fall because of the reason stated by randy. afaik there's no reason why his identity would cause the price to rise. |
|
|
|
|
I spot a free slot. may I?
Bitcoin Address: 1HCo4Uw2sSZv2KBFML3dKMzfv6pRF27tMh
Avatar: Yes
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
