The statement claiming a forum uid is digitally signed. What other digital signatures do you want?
An actual signed message from the key. Everything else is just you him wasting everybody's time. For the nth time: What is the substantial difference between a digital signature on a userid (plus the primary key binding signature from the signing subkey, which I doubt you even understand the significance of)—and a digital signature on a clearsigned text file with substantially the same content, posted together with the initial publication of the key? You have been wasting my time providing you with patient technical explanations that either you are too lazy to read, or you are too stupid to understand. For you to attempt insulting me is despicable. Either explain in technical terms why I am so terribly wrong, which logically requires answering the above question, or fork off with your security theatre. Producing a signature using the private key is proof of ownership of the paired public key. Producing a public key in itself is not proof of possession of the paired private key, regardless of what extra features are embedded in that key. This is a logically simple concept and should be fairly easy to understand. Like I said earlier, what if somebody created the account and the key pair at the same time, and then passed off the account to somebody else while keeping the key pair for themselves? Was the post with the public key also timestamped at the exact same moment of creation as the account and key pair? Obviously no, it wasn't. You're asking us to assume the public key is theirs because of the embedded data within the key, and that's fine, but if I were serious about cryptography I wouldn't use that as a substitution for production of a signature using the private key. I would ask for more substantial proof of ownership before attempting to send an encrypted message to that person. Regardless, as I'll never have any interaction with ploney baloney that needs to be encrypted I really don't care, nor do I think they will ever say anything of importance for which their signature is required to authenticate they are the one saying it, so its a moot point. Others are welcome to disagree with my interpretation, and that's fine. |
|
|
|
The statement claiming a forum uid is digitally signed. What other digital signatures do you want?
An actual signed message from the key. Everything else is just you him wasting everybody's time. |
|
|
|
At this point there is proof that Ploni has access to the secret key, or the ability to sign a message with it. Anyone can create a GPG key and embed any user name they want into it, but the fact that Spartacus Ploni posted the key and it has his forum ID in it, we can assume that he created the key, and that he has access to the secret key which will allow him to sign messages. But that's it, all we have is enough to assume, not enough to prove.
I was thinking about it and yes I suppose its more just a matter of common courtesy and/or protocol to sign a message from the key as proof of ownership. Theoretically, somebody could have created the key pair and the account and then handed off only the account to nullius er ploni baloney (though however unlikely), but much like Craig Wright's interpretation of private key ownership, signing a message with the key only proves that you own(ed) the key at that particular moment, so ultimately either way, well I guess, who really cares. |
|
|
|
Ok guys, that's it. I'm done with the WO for a few months.
There's enough overblown lunacy in the MSM over this coronavirus, I don't need to come here and read the same panicky bullshit (it's the fkn flu guys).
I'll probably log back in sometime in May or June when this whole thing has blown over.
And when it has, I'll surely raz the shit out of some of you hypochondriacs daily when I come back (you know who you are).
^^^--- Fixed my post for you, W00ps.  His fault for watching MSM. I typed "panicky bullshit" into google images and this came up, thought it was fitting:  This also came up:  |
|
|
|
Damn, he's really putting our money where his mouth is when it comes to following through with his "America First" message. Exclusive access? That's a completely wrong and risky path Trump is following there. He is completely underestimating the amount of LIFETIME-HATE that would generate in pretty much billions of people (or the survivors from that figure) from the rest of world if he really succeed in that.
Meh, pretty standard for The Donald, and he could live with that. I don't think he's ever really given two shits about what anybody thinks about him. Hence the clown makeup and incessant foreign policy blunders. Its part of his "charm." |
|
|
|
I've reviewed and analyzed dozens, if not hundreds of ICOs over the past 4 years, and my conclusion is:
This thing is going to drop like a cold rock from outer space.
Too many buzzwords, catch phrases, instant application of blockchain technology to a "problem" that doesn't need a solution.
Plus, the whitepaper was published less than 6 months ago, and this thing has a multi-hundred million dollar market cap, yet only exists as a token?
Its too well polished to be anything other than.... polish.
Feel free to prove me wrong. I'll eat my own words and apologize in this thread.
Turns out I was right, but it only took me until about July-Sept 2018 to be right. Was just wondering why this thread kept showing up in my unread replies, and now i know. |
|
|
|
America is not showing a great deal of diligence with their airport queues. https://twitter.com/Danai_data/status/1239167060028129280People are spending 6 hours or more jammed that close together coming back from Europe which I'm led to believe is bringing the 'foreign virus' over due to not being Winners. Damn, glad I'm not going anywhere. Guess if they didn't shovel everybody in together, people would be stretched out waiting on the tarmac. Hopefully nobody had a cough. You bring up a good point though. Trump should just tweet that only losers get coronavirus. That would surely stop it.
Perhaps nobody wants to hear it, but I fear we're not out of the woods yet, folks. 3 days ago Chainalysis said that PlusToken wasn't done dumping their BTC. They "only" have about 30k left to go -- we won't know its over until they tell us so. In that blog post (I think its been posted here already) they go over the correlation between PlusToken BTC hitting exchanges and drops in corn prices, seems to be pretty unmistakeable. To me, I'm surprised they still have some to go, but I see no reason for Chainalysis to lie about this kind of thing as their business depends on them being right. |
|
|
|
This is the current Top 20: Ah, its times like this that I wish I weren't colorblind. I believe that's what the curves would tell you, though we've also never seen Satoshi's posts merited in a parabolic bullrun with lots of new users entering the space.
Except new users start with zero merit and tend to accrue sendable merits pretty slowly. It is interesting that satoshi was one of two users to immediately gain several hundred merits. The other user being the man who invented the merit system. |
|
|
|
Nobody can claim that I didn't prepare for this lock down.   Damn, that's a big ass cone! Challenge accepted. |
|
|
|
I opened a thread last year about 10th anniversary memes, and even though it was kind of a flop, there were some good memes posted in it. This was probably my favorite one: |
|
|
|
This reminds me of the time serial crypto scammer Bryce Wiener sent a BTC tip to ISIS through a tipping service, in 2015: https://www.coindesk.com/changetip-user-banned-isisEven though he was banned from using the service, he was never sentenced to jail or anything. “Many of the tools we keep wishing we had to live in a more decentralized future we already have,” Weiner told CoinDesk. “The power to disrupt the status quo and the existing narrative is already in our hands and we have only but to use them. I’m not in jail. Nothing bad has happened to me, what does that mean?” It means you're a white man with a vanilla-ass name, Bryce. |
|
|
|
This coin is the bargain of the century. Mark my words. In 1 years this coin is 20 to 30x higher.
PLU 12/8/17: $11.89 PLU 12/8/18: $0.37 Words marked! At least your price is back up to a whole $1.00. But really guys, why are you using sockpuppets to create fake activity on your thread? You're not bumping it to the top of the page (I am, however, simply by writing this post) -- there's no reason for you to do this. It makes your project look insincere. Just trying to give you some advice. |
|
|
|
i tried looking into it but i got bored very fast. there is a lot of false information that the media is throwing around about this scam but in my view it doesn't seem any different from thousands of similar scams that have been happening in the past couple of years.
it is mostly being hyped up with exaggerated numbers these days because price has gone down and they are looking for reasons to spread more and more FUD.
I know you're not a big fan of Chainalysis but they put the number of BTC collected at around 200,000, which is quite a bit. However, they recently said that the last move down to $3850 probably wasn't due to PlusToken as they have yet to move their remaining stash to exchanges... This was 3 days ago, so who knows how things have progressed since then. https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/plustoken-scam-bitcoin-priceThings could actually get worse if they decide to slam the market with this last batch of BTC. |
|
|
|
Great, McAfee makes a prediction about the virus, that means now we know for sure the exact opposite is true and this will be devastating. Seriously though, can anyone remember the last time McAfee was right about... anything? |
|
|
|
Turns out this was a much bigger affair then previously let on. first of all if they are using mixers then a blockchain analyzer has no way of knowing where the coins are really going to. so they can not really make the conclusion that they are selling on the market and crashing the price. for all we know they are converting it to monero...
That's not exactly true... There's way of tracing coins other than through following their addresses. Sometimes outputs have similar characteristics such as size, timestamp when moved, and their eventual destination. If 5,000 coins are all put into ChipMixer at the same time and 5,000 coins end up moving all to the same final address however many weeks later, its safe to say those belong to the same owner. Regardless, Chainalysis didn't actually use the word "Chipmixer," they focused more on Wasabi wallet, and this image demonstrates just how futile their efforts were:  |
|
|
|
|
Well, turns out we should have been worried!
I would merit OP but he hasn't logged in for a long time.
Its hard to believe that whatever PlusToken had left could drag down the market this far, but I'm willing to believe its a combination of things that led to a perfect storm for bitcoin (and crypto), so to speak.
The cycle works something like this (outside of any pre-existing stock market based woes):
1. Ponzi BTC get dumped en masse on the market at any 'ol price
2. A massive downward movement liquidates several leveraged positions, lowering the price even more
3. Institutional investors see their profits being eaten into and sell their coins and/or de-leverage their positions
4. Average investors panic and sell their coins
5. More positions are liquidated
6. Buyers re-emerge thinking we have hit bottom
7. Repeat, until all BTC is dumped.
That's how a relatively small amount of coins (though they did have 1% of the total BTC supply at the height of the scam) can cause so much damage when sold all at once.
|
|
|
|
Perhaps you might even be able to figure out that 1 USD at time t (e.g. in the year 1995) is almost never the same as 1 USD at time s =/= t (e.g. today).
Yes, it is. 1 USD = 1 USD, always, every day since April 2, 1792. Your example doesn't hold regardless of the presence of a central bank as it concerns the argument at hand.
 My example was serving to make what you were saying more logically palatable, and then you mangled it to make it once again illogical. When bitserve said this: It's just an equal sign with both *IDENTICAL* values at each side of the equal sign. That shouldn't be debatable.
he is _clearly_ talking about a reflexive property here, X = X. You are arguing against that, saying no, X doesn't equal X because X before is different than X now. While its value changes, the USD is not inherently different. It is always the same denomination of legal tender to be used in the U.S. for goods and services. The _value_ as measured against a basket of currencies or a gallon of milk or whatever is different -- that is a characteristic of X. You're just saying flat out X ≠ X, which is dumb. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
