Bad idea:  This must have happened on purpose. I guess it implies that intelligence isn't equal with passion. Right? |
|
|
|
Is this an application? Your IQ is 161. My IQ is higher than that unless the word that refers to a specialized type of building in a garden that is used for the growing of citrus trees isn't "Orangery". It's an application. |
|
|
|
Selling merits is prohibited. Selling IQ points (which is kind of the same thing) is also prohibited. Do you accept Chuck E Cheese tokens and Pokémon cards for payment? You mean hashes of images of Pokémon cards? |
|
|
|
What if my Covid test results are above 160 and my IQ test positive? Is that acceptable?  |
|
|
|
We've given KYC, (fake) bitcoins for (fake!) NFTs and now an IQ test? That's a humor.  |
|
|
|
Look it up. Και εσυ ρε γιδι? Τι καλα! Περαστικα σου. Δεν συμφωνώ σχεδόν με κανέναν από το WO όσον αφορά πολιτικά ζητήματα. Αυτό δε σημαίνει πως θα ασχοληθώ. Εσύ από την άλλη τη «μπαίνεις» συνέχεια σε όλους σε αυτό το νήμα και ακόμα να καταλάβω το γιατί. Τι θέλεις να τους αλλάξεις τη γνώμη; Πας καλά;
|
|
|
|
I think you have a problem with those who has Ukrainian flag as Avatar. I think he just has a problem. Period. |
|
|
|
|
Life's a little bit fucked up lately. Nevertheless, I'll commit my sin as a "honorary merit source" and cycle my precious along with the crew for a day.
4 cycling sources. Only 107 left.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is actually based on greed and without could not function. There's difference between incentive and greed. Incentive is when you're motivated to do something for you or/and the common good and has a nearly positive meaning. For example, we say that you're incentivized to recycle if there's a law that charges those who don't. On the other hand, greed is by definition, negative. You use it to describe bad things, such as eating while you're full. Miners are incentivized to earn their reward as they only do good. Environmental issues? No problem, they're incentivized to switch to cheaper, renewable ones. |
|
|
|
Because you don't need specific address. You need any address. I still don't understand. Don't you hash a script in P2SH? Whether that contains multiple public keys or just one. |
|
|
|
In my opinion, to fight this type of FUD we need to clarify this distinction for newcomers. That's realistically impossible. Each one of us (even in this forum) has a certain limit in informing and affecting people; we're limited in borders. For example, whatever I say or create in this forum or even in social media is very limited. On the other hand, the one who controls the media can accomplish this much easier. And that's a serious sociopolitical problem, beyond Bitcoin. I believe we do our best, though.
I'm stealing this from WO, 'cause it's hilarious: |
|
|
|
P.S. Did testnet exist from the start? The wiki only has a timestamp for version 3. Testnet was introduced in v0.3.14, which was released in October 2010. And in Bitcoin time, that must have happened around in block 86700. They could have used the testnet. What do you guys think? Nice! One thing I'd also add is sats per dollar. The next million will take around 4 more years, if my calculations are correct, right? It's 110,148 blocks 'til next halving. That's 688,425 BTC. Then, it's 311,575 BTC left which will take 311,575 / 3.125 = 99,704 blocks. So, we're 110,148 + 99,704 = 209,852 blocks far. That's ~1457 days = 3.94 years. Yep. |
|
|
|
if you want to have an altcoin that is 1:1 covered with Bitcoin and it is one-way-ticket, then you can mine it just by getting less coins in the coinbase transaction, then for burning 1 BTC you can get 1 ALT. It would be better if Counterparty would do such things, rather than sending coins to 1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr There's no need to do either of those. Just use OP_RETURN and within those few bytes insert the destination (usually it's a hash) of the altcoin's address, plus some extra info such as the alt's prefix. That's the most convenient way to say "Hey, I'm burning these for the 29th dog coin". But why? Is this their good will? Is it a wrongly configured setup, or a bug that affected miners who mined those particular blocks? I don't see why they would turn down the block reward voluntarily. I'm sure most of those happened due to a wrongly configured setup. Whoever wants to test things does it in testnet. For those who want to "do good" there are hundreds of better ways I can think of, other than burning coins for the "common good". |
|
|
|
After doing 2^80 operations, it may be possible to reach address collision. Why 2^80? Wouldn't it be likely if you searched half of the [1, 2^160] range? Half is 2^159. I remember I had seen 2^80 (for RIPEMD-160) and 2^128 (for SHA-256), but I don't remember why it's the square root of their range and not half numbers of their range. |
|
|
|
[...] Doesn't that require you to already have a channel with the amount you want to mix, so that you can immediately exchange LN-BTC for BTC? Also, what about the time? It plays a big role when it comes to privacy. If a chain analysis company routed a 0.16 BTC payment it could be far nearer to the new address. (That received money few seconds/minutes later) |
|
|
|
I agree with you that there are posts in that thread that are more deserving of merit, but those posts (like Welsh's) have already received an abundance of merit. I am interested in awarding merit to posts that I believe to be woefully under merited; Sure, that's what you should have done either way, but I'd prefer including 1-2 if they were objectively better than one that just wasn't merited as much as it should. It's not only Welsh's by the way. Husires is a good contributing member of our forum, from what I can tell, and is likely on the fast-track to ranking up to Legendary. I don't want to be misunderstood; Husires isn't a spammer nor a merit beggar. They're somewhat established and do contribute to the forum. All I'm saying is that if I had to pick 10 posts that deserve merit and have none, I wouldn't have picked more than one of Husires'.
In mid-2021, theymos added lots of merit sources, so I doubt you'll get the required attention. |
|
|
|
We could have a better picture of what you evaluate if you didn't just select topics, solely. For example, in topic=5386927 there have been more merit-worthy posts than the OP, as far as I can judge. Your choices aren't bad (although I disagree with Husires being selected 6 times), but neither good as a whole. I have not seen a single bad word from you, so I vote for you This is not how you vote people - in general. |
|
|
|
Hey, new address for me - can you please quote and verify my message? Thank you! -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
<This is efialtis from bitcointalk, please verify my adress, todays date is 30/03/2022>
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
<bc1qrvfecfcl830crmccw5vqz5gt62dcg6mtgv7dhl>
<ICw8fvtsMQ6Beu7zv0rGaAJ8RWBqrXH8V5g0l87twsj0PStxogPVmA1KAmjjxfhKFp4y8wYyz/UyW32YshwnDPs=>
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- Quoted and verified. |
|
|
|
Or it doesn't have to be hack, because if a hacker steals 51% of the total supply in circulation, that would give their developers and holders a reason to hard fork and roll back the chain. Which brings us to the other problem: Inability to produce consensus. |
|
|
|
Also just buying 50% of ASICs is never going to happen, at least not quickly. Then you'll have to set them all up and sell them back after your attack. Exactly, this can take a very long time. Not to mention that if a nutty billionaire attempted to attack the network that way, he had to spend a lot of time trying to gain access to all that hardware which would reveal their malicious activity and ill-intentioned behavior. On the other hand, a person can buy half the coins relatively quickly and leave no one able to figure it out. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
