I have successfully bought 0.3BTC from VirWoX (ref. link) just one month ago. The first withdrawal is processed manually, mine was sent about 40 hours after credit card authorisation. You must first buy SLL with credit card, then buy BTC with SSL, when withdraw BTC. Fees are high. But it works, and it's been working for *years*.

I beg to disagree, but thanks for the trivia anyway, I didn't know that

FYI, unless the (alleged) sender's domain has got SPF records and your mail server implements it, anyone can just change his 'From:' address to whatever he wants just by going to 'Settings...' in the mail client.

Actually bitcointalk.org *does* have an SPF record protecting it with a strict (-all) policy: according to standards, the phishing message should have been rejected, but your mail server probably doesn't enforce the requested policy. Funny thing is that a domain such as 'whitehouse.gov' uses a relaxed policy (~all), so phishing e-mails from 'whitehouse.gov' would end up in your spam folder at best

Well as long as your nickname is not related to your wallet.dat I guess you're safe...

Seriously, I think it's safer not to put all eggs in one basket indeed, but current 'companies' don't offer security levels anywhere near commercial banks, except *maybe* for companies like Fidor Bank AG, but there are so few aiming at that level...

In the meantime I feel safer owning *all* of my private keys. At this (early) stage, If I die, they'll die with me, and I'm ok with that. I only have a few coins right now so it's no big deal, when I had much more one year ago, I used to keep most of them in a cold (paper) wallet, and the only copy of the private key was kept in a separate physical location by a friend that I could trust 100%.

Le Darkcoin, bin euh comment dire....... non je vais laisser cette partie aux trolls. Mais trollage à part, fais attention car comme j'ai vu que tu ne postes pas souvent, pour résumer 6 mois en une phrase, de nombreux éléments ont ressurgi dernièrement qui laissent fortement entrevoir le même destin pour lui que pour tous les autres shitcoins (principalement le fait que darkcoin = clone de bitcoin + coinjoin, et que le pseudo-anonymat promis est très très pseudo).

Sinon pour la partie utile et non polémique de la réponse, comme pour toutes les autres clones de Bitcoin, les adresses de réception n'existent pas sur le réseau tant qu'elles n'ont pas reçu au moins une transaction. Si tu n'a encore rien envoyé ou reçu sur ces adresses, mais que tu les as simplement générées dans le wallet, c'est donc normal.

It's the same procedure in Windows or Linux, actually, only the location of the bitcoin.conf file changes.

Locate your bitcoin.conf file, it should be ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf

If you're not familiar with the UNIX filesystem paths and hierarchy, and/or using the GUI:

• ~ is your home directory, i.e. /home/<your-username>
• .bitcoin is a hidden directory, so you may need to change display settings if it's not showing up

Then use your favorite editor and add or edit this line:

Au début je me suis dit, "mais quel exchange il utilise pour être aussi bas?"

Et puis après je me suis rappelé, "oh putain l'euro vaut bientôt plus qu'un dollar... misère !"

Interesting graphs, especially for the divergence between pruned and all. Thanks!

Any chance of getting these plotted on a linear scale, and/or maybe the pruned vs all ratio?

AFAIK TerraMiner IV has 2 separate PSUs. It seems that on your 'Image 2' you have circled 2 capacitors, does that mean that both exploded at the same time, and that you plugged in both power cables to the mains at the same time?

And do you confirm that it occurred when the PSUs were connected to the mains, and not when you attempted to power on the unit? What voltage are you using, I assume datacenter means 220V? Did you test the resistance between the neutral and live pins of the C13 connector?

Blowing 2 units in a row leaves little chance for a coincidence... good luck!

Yes and AFAIK, so does searching, and anything that involves an HTTP POST. I might be wrong though.

The 360 sec throttle is a pain when you are a "legitimate" newbie, but as you said, it will go away as soon as your account gets more activity. Keep in mind the huge amount of noise generated by newly created accounts, I think it's a necessary evil.

The simple fact that you're not bearing a commercial (paid for) signature and a short outlook of your posts clearly show that you are on the right track to becoming a valuable member, so just be patient and keep posting sensible and useful stuff

EDIT: oh, and edits are probably counted as 'post' actions too

Block timestamps are set by the block miner/pool. Since Bitcoin is decentralized, there is no absolute time reference within the network (and there shouldn't be). There will always be clock variations between nodes. The blockchain is all about consensus, and the protocol has a tolerance for next block candidates timestamps: they can be slightly in the future, and even slightly in the past, compared to your local clock and the timestamps of previous blocks already in the chain.

In other words, the timestamp is not a strictly increasing sequence, while the block height (of the main chain) is.

First, post the txid (transaction id).

1 satoshi is not an appropriate fee. Either go without any fee if your transaction qualifies for exemption, or pay the appropriate fee of 0.0001 per 1KB of tx size (see here for details). In blockchain.info and any decent Bitcoin client, it is done automatically. In your case, it seems that you played with fire by manually editing and lowering the fee in 'Advanced' settings.

What you can do now about the unconfirmed tx is either:

• Wait for it to expire (don't know about BC.info policy on unconfirmed tx expiry, you should contact them for details), or
• Have one of the outputs spend the unconfirmed coins with an appropriate fee, i.e. a fee covering at least both transactions according to the rule described above, and then some pools implementing this "cascading" feature like Eligius should confirm it (however, it may be difficult to spend coins from unconfirmed transactions, you will probably need help).

I have no idea about the amount in your unconfirmed transaction, but if it's less than, say, 0.05BTC, it might not even be worth the effort, depending on your own standards (i.e. how you value the time that you will spend resolving it)

For various reasons, I'm interested in statistics and visualizations of unspent outputs aka UTXO in the blockchain. After some googling and research on this forum, I found that I wasn't the only one (example). I think indeed that there is a lot of useful information that could be extrapolated about Bitcoin usage patterns, using this kind of bottom-up approach.

Things could get really interesting if the stats and visualizations weren't only a snapshot at given time, but a series of them at regular (meaningful) intervals, watching the evolution as the coins are moving across time.

The closest thing that I found so far is Tim Swanson's article on CoinDesk (also on his blog). It's a very interesting read for sure, and the animation (YouTube video) is very nice. Unfortunately, as you would expect from any article, it's not an "active" dataset, i.e. the visualizations aren't updated with new data.

As an experiment, I started building a dataset myself, extracting all unspent outputs from the blockchain. The first thing that I noticed while doing this is the massive amount of generated coins that were never spent at the beginning of the chain (i.e. 2009 + early 2010). It would be interesting to postulate that these coins will actually never be spent, and to watch for any movement to confirm or invalidate that assumption.

Value of generated coins that are unspent as of March 18, 2015 (block height 348050)

Generation Year	Total Value
2009	1,078,402
2010	668,450
2011	58,345
2012	17,171
2013	19,362
2014	30,315
2015	45,252

Besides the special case of early generated coins, IMHO these statistics could greatly help analyze what I'd call cold coins:

• First criteria would be the age of unspent outputs
• Assuming P2PKH, another criteria of last activity for that pubkey can be added into the equation

Here's a screenshot from my work in progress (just a quick sheet in Numbers for now)



Unfortunately my dataset isn't perfectly accurate, I guess this is caused by the lack of support for P2SH in my extraction script. As a result, the grand total of all unspent outputs in my set is 14,021,913BTC while the actual total should be about 13,950,650BTC. However, IMO this shouldn't affect the overall relevance of the stats too much.

So, the purpose of this post could also be the tl;dr:

• How much interest is there for this kind of statistics and visualizations?
• Are you aware of any existing, active project for this, as I don't want to reinvent the wheel?
• What interpretations, if any, do you think can be done from this? (e.g. computing some kind of "adjusted" market cap)
• How would you represent the evolution of these stats across time (e.g. like the animation in Tim Swanson's article)

Thanks for your feedback

Jamais essayé, mais en tout cas ils sont résistants à l'échelle Bitcoin, vu que je me souviens déjà en avoir entendu parler en 2013. Ils ont un look assez pro, après pour le reste c'est risqué comme tout investissement.

Le topic officiel existe depuis fin 2012

Login is working again for me, hopefully it will stay so

I know as little about BitShares as I knew about Bitcoin back in 2011.

I can't speak about the contents of the 20 minutes video: I couldn't stand watching it, because I feel like it's totally the wrong media type. If you have such a loooooooooooooong message to tell the world, use text, not video. I would be ok with reading the transcript, though.

However, I read how it works from bitshares.org and some bits from the wiki. It seems interesting but complicated, just like Bitcoin

About the hate on this forum, there are 2 things that I'd like to point out.

First is that while I see some parallels in blockchain technology, I fail to understand the relationship between Bitcoin and Bitshares. There are *zero* occurrences of 'bitcoin' on the 'How it works' page. So maybe that Bitcoin invested people are perceiving it as a competing crypto, aka altcoin, and altcoins justifiably got a bad name on this forum because of what I'd call the "shitcoin spree" in 2014.

Second is that what I call the noise on this forum has increased significantly during the last two years, compared to what I experienced when I started posting here in early 2013. Let me define it shortly: I call 'signal' people exchanging ideas and information about Bitcoin. I call 'noise' people trolling, those who see bitcoin as a get-rich-quick thingie, those who want to earn $$$ without working, etc. Unfortunately, the signal-to-noise ratio has gone much lower when Bitcoin prices started to explode (it was $27 when I joined).

So, it might be genius or stupid, I can't really say at this stage. What I can say is that I wouldn't take the hate here as a reasonable confirmation or denial of BitShares being either genius or stupid.

Honor fails where anonymity prevails

This is the one piece of info that really shocked me in the Bitcoin Reporter article, the rest was already known from here. I don't know about the author's sources, but just the idea of AM completely ignoring the bus factor, given its size, is just plain... flabbergasting

I think it is only sanity to repeat Cloudmining 101 on top of every page until a mining address is posted...