|
Is anyone able to get along to the directions hearing to hear what the blow by blow discussion entails? Would be interested to know who has turned up: Owners/Employees and or their legal representatives.
|
|
|
|
Though I'm not XRP enthusiast neither will i advise anyone to invest in the coin but I went through the archived page and I'm sure this is not from XRP because the scam strategy wrote on the site was been used by a crypto scammer before. Besides, i don't see any reason why XRP will want to spoil their own project.
Scammers only need a small percentage of users to fall for their scam for it to be profitable. There's no way to warn others on external sites - all we can do here is document and warn. |
|
|
|
|
After four days I'm actually surprised the way the voting is going, but never-the-less everyone's done well to get where they are today.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a multibit HD wallet which I had tried many months/years ago. I still have the twelve word mnemonic phrase and have just entered those into my Blue Lightning Network Wallet under the create new wallet/import wallet feature.
After displaying a blank screen for a while (and I'm talking (a couple of minutes)) the wallet was imported successfully. (The wallets never had any funds in it, so it only shows "Latest Transaction: never")
The name given to the wallet was "Imported HD SegWit (BIP84 Beach32 Native)" Under "Wallet description" in Blue there are further options to Export/backup and Show Wallet XPUB.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
OK, the short story is that - I downloaded the newest version (Ver 1.17) which was three days old.
- Installed NVidia Ver 10.2
- ran vanitysearch -check
- then after some trial and error (and reading the last three pages) I have entered
vanitysearch.exe -t 0 -gpu -stop -i find.txt -o found.txt
And it works.
Originally, I had 2114 search patterns, but I've trimmed it down to a more modest 497 search patterns. Both were/are pulling about 60Mk/s-65Mk/s although I'm reading that with less to search there are higher speeds. I haven't done any testing with smaller numbers of patterns. After about nineteen hours I've found a half a dozen six letter/number files used to ensure the previous program was still working as my search list are mostly eight plus letters/number combinations long and take many days/weeks to find. |
|
|
|
Seems like everyone's joining in...*edit* Withdrawn as have been accepted elsewhere. Thanks again.  |
|
|
|
|
The price is bouncing around a bit, but preev is saying $50 = BTC 0.0053 at the moment.
*edit*
I have 0.0079 total which preev says is worth a fraction over $75 if you want it?
|
|
|
|
@ PerkjeffOther than the expression what exactly is the connection between the examples given? Facebook profile link. Related are the resume of all links provided by the user. Hmm, looks like my mobile phone was trimming the side of the post off. It doesn't normally do that. Yes, you're quite right (I was only seeing the jobair mostly on the left of screen). |
|
|
|
So far I have only installed (upgraded) NVidia Cuda to Ver 10.2 I have this as my command: VanitySearch_V1.17>vanitysearch -g 5x,128y -i find.txt -o findout.txt -stop Not sure what I'm supposed to put at regardless it starts then crashes.
This is a typical output. VanitySearch v1.17
Search: 5 prefixes (Lookup size 5) [Compressed]
Start Wed Feb 5 15:09:14 2020
Base Key: F2957B149DAE0AF5CD7D4ECBC8AC163D552EF4FD8AB9F54AC3DBF93B9EDA91F8
Number of CPU thread: 2 But nothing is written to file.
*edit* Still can't find a VanitySearch.sln file. |
|
|
|
Theymos updated DT1, so there are some big changes.
Am just looking at them now. Perhaps as a suggestion - when the change of DT occurrs once a month, that date is shown in a different colour (white?) to signify it's not a change in views, just the monthly soft shoe shuffle. |
|
|
|
FWIW I've archived the proof of the webpage's scam in case anyone wants to reference it later: Archive [ 1a], [ 1b] |
|
|
|
Alright, where can I find a VanitySearch.sln and where can I get a Visual C++ 2017 ?
The sln file is included in the repository. Start by cloning the repository (you need git to be installed) git clone https://github.com/JeanLucPons/VanitySearch.gitVisual Studio community edition is freely available from the Microsoft Website (I don't know if 2017 can still be download but it should work also with 2019, if it is not working with 2019 then I'll try to make a path). Then launch visual studio and open the sln file. I've updated to version 10.2 of the Nvidia Cuda and tried running the program. It works for a few seconds - hangs - then crashes. Other parts of NVidia are now asking to be updated, so am just working on them too. |
|
|
|
I have a creepy mod stalking me and deleting my posts, this is yet another one: A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. [mod note: post broke either rule 21 or 32 from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0 and thus has been merged with the first one in a row]
Turning to who DIStrusts them: ~geophphreigh's judgement is Distrusted by:
- ~efialtis's judgement is Distrusted by:
- Ratimov and zasad@ are both distrusted by the same three people, so Ratimov is distrusted by eleven, while zasad@ and Rikafilp one a piece.
To me Ratimov is a clear stand out - you can't get ahead in life without upsetting a few people along the way. I'm leaning towards Rikaflip because he has five trust Vs one distrust (discounting those who distrust both Ratimov etc in my analysis above). Also unlike the other two stand outs, Rikafikp isn't playing the trust game:
My two votes therefore are Ratimov and Rikaflip.Congratulations to all the others nominated. |
|
|
|
Alright, where can I find a VanitySearch.sln and where can I get a Visual C++ 2017 ? |
|
|
|
|
Is there a windows walk through please?
|
|
|
|
Account is currently locked. So, no need to add -ve trust.
If ever it will be unlocked then I will access it and no one else.
As with the last time, send me a PM and I 'll remove the negative warning. Regards, |
|
|
|
Do you (or anyone) have a screenshot of the stats page or some other source as to what used to be on that page? I remember the number of posts (and percentage) per board, number of poll-votes and a graph showing the distribution of activity per hour of the day The first two Known alts threads have various screen shots (as well as links to archived pages) - the Mk III thread doesn't have any given the elapsed time after the feature was disabled. A very handy tool - some users would be well and truly Butt Hurt TM they weren't an alt and the proof would be in the pudding as it were when the stats page would show (for example) both users were online in the same two hour period of the day over many weeks of activity... Perhaps if you tried the SMF link at bottom of page and viewed their version or, find other forums that use the SMF system then you can glean an idea of the format used.
It would be an interesting exercise to compare users who aren't related and hadn't expected such a feature to be revived... |
|
|
|
...
You aren't arguing against my points. You are just saying "no one will ever agree so I guess we have to have no standards". I like how you frame arbitrary tagging of users without documented basis as "freedom of choice". Almost makes it sounds like you are enforcing people's rights to take other people's rights to exist here like anyone else without being harassed over constantly shifting totally arbitrary rules. You have the right to shut the fuck up and be subject to the random whims of internet mobs. Que libertad! (there's a certain irony in this file name): https://talkimg.com/images/2023/05/16/blobd824e2e0c6d91a25.jpeg 
Same goes with Lauda: Archive [ 1a], [ 1b] I'm not participating given that it is a unmoderated thread. I'll just be tagging more often, and more faster.
Have fun.
D.
These people have no regard for their frivolous application of negative trust feedback and freely gloat they aren't using the trust feedback for what it is intended. |
|
|
|
Hopefully this post and the next one will make the decision a little easier: Ratimov and zasad@ are each trusted by eigh plus eachother. Taking those eight away, Ratimov has nine people trusting him, zasad@ two, geophphreigh two also, Rikafip five people trust him, and finally efialtis also on two, so my top three are Ratimov, zasad@ and Rikafip.
Turning to who DIStrusts them: ~geophphreigh's judgement is Distrusted by:
- ~efialtis's judgement is Distrusted by:
- Ratimov and zasad@ are both distrusted by the same three people, so Ratimov is distrusted by eleven, while zasad@ and Rikafilp one a piece.
To me Ratimov is a clear stand out - you can't get ahead in life without upsetting a few people along the way. I'm leaning towards Rikaflip because he has five trust Vs one distrust (discounting those who distrust both Ratimov etc in my analysis above). Also unlike the other two stand outs, Rikafikp isn't playing the trust game:
My two votes therefore are Ratimov and Rikaflip.Congratulations to all the others nominated. |
|
|
|
|
My first negative feedback is on sardasa's main account stating I do not trust the hacker in a trade thus I believe I am using the trust feedback in the New! and Improved! fashion as outlined by theymos a few days ago.
(still no response from him concerning my question in his newest thread)
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
