I don't believe Diablo to be a fit Mod. See exhibit B: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91710.0 Stickies another trolling (self interest) thread, as corroborated by multiple other members, unstickies it, then denies it was ever stickied. I think this was an accident. He unstickied it a few hours after he stickied it. |
|
|
|
|
His account was banned. (He still needs to pay back his lenders, of course.)
|
|
|
|
Right. An output's script provides an algorithm for determining whether that output can be spent, and any input trying to spend the output provides the arguments for that algorithm. That being said, do most miners actually accept transactions like this? Or do they just reject any transaction that does not follow the typical pattern? (I read about the mtgox loss, but it seemed like a lot of miners were rejecting that transaction.) Everyone accepts non-standard transactions if they appear in a block. The default client doesn't mine or relay non-standard transactions. A few big miners like Eligius do accept them, though. |
|
|
|
|
Email is P2P. You can easily run your own SMTP server.
|
|
|
|
|
It's essentially random. You can't choose which addresses to send from with the default bitcoin.org client.
|
|
|
|
I don't require moderators to pledge an oath of neutrality in all forum discussions.  Moderators will not censor themselves. I'll express my opinions freely, and I expect other moderators (and other members) to do the same. |
|
|
|
Why shorten them in the first place?
URLs are counted in the signature character limit. I plan to fix this and only count visible characters at some point. In posts, people on mobile devices often like to use URL shorteners for some reason. Maybe because long URLs don't fit their screen? I'm not sure. (I've never owned a smartphone.) URL shorteners are stripped from newbie posts. |
|
|
|
What is the forum policy on link shorteners as I see no mention of this anywhere?
They're fine. |
|
|
|
The "savings trust" is a Ponzi scheme. I'm not talking about "oh, but maybe the poor fella will default" or something on that level. Everything from the cheap building of trust, the friendly update messages and the time-scale of the thing is nothing but textbook fraudster routine. The funds are hardly flowing enough for good money laundering, there are cheaper means to do that anyway, and even if it were to work there's simply no reason to still pay out this sort of interest to lenders. Ever heard of "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"?
I completely agree. I'm not at all worried about BTCST's failure hurting the community, though. A lot of shady assets will fail and a few individuals will lose a lot of money, but I don't think there will be any long-term damage. |
|
|
|
|
I think it only removes the animation if it has to resize the image.
|
|
|
|
The  logo is pretty good and professional-looking, though I prefer Satoshi's logo (seen in the forum's favicon) when you just want a single coin and no text. There's probably room for improvement, but I think the current logos are more than good enough. |
|
|
|
The network gradually forgets about 0-confirmation transactions if no one is rebroadcasting them, so it's possible to cancel a 0-confirmation transaction if it doesn't make it into a block for several days. The client doesn't support this yet, though -- it rebroadcasts forever. So... How is this preventable? It seems to me like quite the large issue...
Wait for a few confirmations. |
|
|
|
My post count jumped by 400 the other day. I looked through my previous posts to see if anything stood out but didn't see anything. It was back to normal the next day though.
I think this is why that happened: - "MOVED: " topics don't normally increase your post count. (I think.) - I recounted all post counts recently, and this included "MOVED: " topics. - Later, I deleted all "MOVED: " topics and recounted again. |
|
|
|
I use TrueCrypt for most encryption and 7-zip for some things. TrueCrypt's method is definitely very strong. 7-zip's method is less strong, but still good enough IMO. GPG can be configured to securely encrypt files, but the default symmetric encryption method isn't very good and the interface sucks (gpg's asymetrical interface sucks, too...). Truecrypt of course, GnuPG is for mail, go read the manuals.
You should read the manuals. |
|
|
|
When I tried to get coverage in the US between jobs I was screwed. The rates I was being quoted were in the lines of what you could make doing a minimum wage job.
This is due to too much government regulation, not too little... |
|
|
|
|
He did use Windows. The first versions of Bitcoin were developed on Microsoft Visual Studio.
|
|
|
|
I tried that once and theymos was an asshole about it.
I've only ever sent you two scam-related sentences via PM, so I don't know how you got that impression. |
|
|
|
i remember you gave me ip addresses for previous scammers
That's after they were already proven to be scammers. I won't do it during an investigation. |
|
|
|
|
I don't ever want there to be innocent people falsely marked as scammers, so I require quite a bit of proof before scammer-tagging anyone. Sometimes there are very clear-cut cases that don't require any additional proof, but often some investigation is required to collect more proof. Maged has been doing a lot of this investigation work (thanks!), but I don't consider investigating these cases to be a function of the board. I don't expect moderators to spend any time investigating scam cases.
Now Maged is busy, and people seeking to have someone scammer-tagged are finding that all of the moderators are ignoring them. What such people should do is hire a non-moderator to collect the evidence. Moderators have no advantage in these investigations over non-moderators, since only admins have IP logs, access to PMs, etc.
Scam investigators need to convince me that someone is almost certainly a scammer. This is done by:
- Finding conclusive evidence that the suspect has scammed someone.
- Compiling all of the evidence into a short report (not strewn across a huge thread).
- Posting all of the evidence in a new thread in "Trading discussion".
- After at least a few days of public discussion, send me the link to the thread with the evidence.
If you think I might have evidence that would prove that someone is guilty (PMs, IP logs, etc.), compile the evidence you do have to show "probable cause" and ask me specific questions that will clearly help the case when answered. I will not actually give you IP addresses or PMs -- I check them myself and give you answers based on the info.
I might be willing to give some free forum advertising to a reputable person/company specializing in scam investigations.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
