Refer: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1635890.msg16490777#msg16490777-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is Timelord2067 u=131361 staking Wallet Addresses
1EscrowTLfob4kvVxZAP2hvZ3uQemWSoYM
1M3un5bqu3hVw5d2Q5Q5jpeZTZXqjdA6FP
1Gur8Vu3tzpm9zZZdfbvcrMfSXqWMdH7HG
to be used for Escrowing by me from 10/10/2016
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1AhuQTWMu185kWFmiUHhmTTVYjKR7BfirW
H9CjrDWuykT89RntplhzJOIRYqxljCNUR9ikJfbrny+ZGb/I3SEO66XOz9KdaH7xiT23y+GQbEafYE/oQoQht6Y=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is Timelord2067 u=131361 staking Wallet Address 1EscrowTLfob4kvVxZAP2hvZ3uQemWSoYM to be used for Escrowing by me from 10/10/2016
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1EscrowTLfob4kvVxZAP2hvZ3uQemWSoYM
G6ktZwfp/gqFOg6HrKG8rkjXeDQ1cDD1/ZQtwNmk/uKVHRwxemjQSRQRlwpEzY2Z2xY9wMx1ilbpwKnlPv5oq8U=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is Timelord2067 u=131361 staking Wallet Address 1M3un5bqu3hVw5d2Q5Q5jpeZTZXqjdA6FP to be used for Escrowing by me from 10/10/2016
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1M3un5bqu3hVw5d2Q5Q5jpeZTZXqjdA6FP
H0nFp9rEGH6rvHeID/hNXS4mMn0nIqH9wIexT3alD9jwf3k0hriDdoRwZqYC7FjcyIkQnpCVTVn0k6VoXNj9VRU=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is Timelord2067 u=131361 staking Wallet Address 1Gur8Vu3tzpm9zZZdfbvcrMfSXqWMdH7HG to be used for Escrowing by me from 10/10/2016
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1Gur8Vu3tzpm9zZZdfbvcrMfSXqWMdH7HG
HxExIW2+fsPs6YCMfAah9eOzoOZfxeoEutVcYq/5M/2SOk1pr25YwB6FHbCeFqGa/RH23iSztXaI0kJsmbKPI0I=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Do not feed the Trolls. All messages verified, obviously. |
|
|
|
My bad. Meant to post that on this account.
Oh well. yeah. Contact me on this account if you're interested.
Regardless of the user ID, the account has virtually no value. Along with the fact that this account could have been hacked from the database leak... No, unfortunately, this account does not count as collateral (unless you have some "collectors" which I doubt supremely.) Why are you seeking a loan after a huge hiatus of 6 years? (that was to the spammers so they don't spam asking for more))
Oops, I guess I'm a spammer. You need more. Usually, spammers point out the obvious... and guess what's happening? |
|
|
|
It is about being on this forum and it is about US based relations. Why do you think google banned China all that time from it's search engines. It is all about politics son!  And pray tell, why do you think a forum based on the concept of decentralization would follow the example of a company attempting to centralize themselves? Take your politics elsewhere. Maybe the Politics & Society section would be a better fit for you? What does Google have to do with Bitcoin? Nothing. I don't think that bitcointalk would be better if it were to be more centralized, only available to certain countries... but I could be wrong. After all, isn't the idea to spread awareness about bitcoin? You won't really do that and help it grow by blocking communication to an entire country. |
|
|
|
Actually it is really hard to understand the different though because this is only affect in a long run and using bot but for some people that only use manual betting and once I dont think that this will really affect them, more over they only use 2x odds
Still wrong. House edge affects you on every bet. If this is not the case, then surely you have no problem with a wager against me with a 49.5% chance of winning, right? Let me add a little bit of Sorites here now: if a 1% house edge only affects the player in the long run (and not those that use manual betting) then a 2% house edge will also be the same, correct? And if a 2% house edge doesn't affect the player, then a 3% house edge won't affect the player. And so on and so forth until you reach... 100% house edge. But wait? At what point does it affect the player? When it changes from 0%. You would rather 0% house edge over 1% house edge. Just like you would rather 1% house edge over 2% house edge. It does not matter whether you play one bet, or ten thousand bets. You would prefer the lower house edge. Why? Because it does affect the RTP. For every n amount you wager, you should expect a return of n - (n*[house edge]) back. If you wager $100 at a 1% house edge, you should expect a return of $99 back. If you wager $100 at a 0% house edge, you should expect a return of $100 back. Even if these are theoretical and only based on averages, they apply in reality. The trends show, and you can't beat math. |
|
|
|
I don't know... I think it would be wrong to ban an entire demographic just because of a slew of spammers that all share a common location... While we're on the topic of spam... Awesome service I love it!
I buy when it's relatively low like now and wait for the rise to happen. Because it eventually does happen. It just takes a matter of time that's all.  YES! Love anything that has Jon Snow in it! You are the rightful king and can command us as your legion of bitcoiners! These are constructive posts?
This would be quite interesting as the stakes are high for physical coins for the prize. I am all in if that is the case! I don't think you would be able to afford those stakes, considering you're literally posting for pennies. But please, continue. We should get these interesting propositions to be bumped... just not with useless posts. |
|
|
|
However a 1% house edge is not much dfferent than a 0% house edge.
Wrong, wrong, wrong! A 1% house edge makes all the difference, between betting at 0 ev vs betting at -ev! You would rather play at a 0% house edge, where you get an average return of 1.00, where if you play at 1% house edge, you get an average return of 0.99. What's so hard to understand about that?
And the constant crap about "no casino will have a 0% house edge" is just recycled bullshit. You think out of all the countless casinos available, there isn't ONE that has 0 ev? (Loosely defining "casino" since just regular dice sites are called "casinos")
That is generally true. But when p2p game is hosted online then host needs to earn money somehow.
There is no house edge in PvP Poker but instead of House Edge you will pay additional explicit fee - i.e. $50+$10 where $50 is fueling prize pool and $10 goes to the house.
Rake is kind of similar to house edge in that it depends on your skill level: if you play at someone with an equal amount of skill as you and you're able to average out wins & losses at the same number of chips/cash (i.e. you win 5, you lose 5) then that's a -ev play. Being +ev in poker however is not dependent on rake %, but skill. More accurately, skill vs. other players in the table/tournament. |
|
|
|
I do not. I got out of Bitcoin a while ago.. Sorry.
Just Curious : - If you got out bitcoin scene a while ago,why you still need to use this forum ? More like your forum account ? Don't worry about people trading with him,since he is covered in all red,no one would bother him for anything. While I take a stance against the account hackers,I personally believe the only way to prove ownership is through signing messages from an address,everything else is gullible. It seems like it checks out. The photobucket site had also uploaded his previous image here: table and carpetand the pictures seem to match, albeit this time a lot darker than the originals.
Anyway, at this point it seems like realkpriess is in fact the owner of the kpriess account (though I am curious to hear the answer to the question you posed). |
|
|
|
If you're serious about it,please make an attempt to explain the matter in detail along with sufficient proofs.Anyone can post a bunch of transactions asking for a refund from particular service.Not giving a shit about those is what the services would choose unless you have a strong accusation.In your case,please show us a proof how is it not paying and what is it not paying for ? Where did you get those addresses from ? Any proof it came off secondstrade.com ? Actually, those addresses are from secondstrade.com (or they appear to be.) For the first transaction, bitcoin address 13VpVj2rp684F2SaZmPc2hr48xYCwhg2jV is used in tx 5982ca20b1af6c6bf7e219983360e3e70d0bc181df74b21ee96db3e7098eff38 where secondstrade's addresses are sending the funds. The second address, 1HnXiS71r2uUci8L5wJuWHjR6sF8hb4wsd, is used in tx 26100cab6bf589f8f5bfc6992f410e213587c6ef07c7760aa74c3422f3163d30 along with other secondstrade's addresses to send to an address. I think that's probably enough proof to show that the addresses are from secondstrade. However, the lack of proof lies in the fact that we don't know whether OP won or lost. |
|
|
|
they already shared his results before to advertise the site. it is worth knowing whether the player continued to win in case there is a flaw or exploit. or if his results normalized.
You mean to say that if you won a lot at a casino but didn't want to publicize the results, that the casino would do that anyway for some random person asking for it? Look - private means private. Perhaps when they made that post the player's stats were still public (I wouldn't know, but that's my general assumption) and they used it as advertisement - okay. Even if there was a flaw or exploit, I'm sure Bitsler wouldn't straight up tell you about it. My assumption? The player was just lucky. |
|
|
|
how much is lixiaogang up now
stats are blocked but i assume hes up probably 80 now
dont ignore please how much is this user up now What do you think the word "private" means? If the user kept their profit public, then you would be able to check. If the user kept their profit private, then they do not wish to share the results. It could be high, or it could be... negative. Bitsler has no obligation to share those results, which in fact, would be a breach of privacy that the user had declared. |
|
|
|
I do not. I got out of Bitcoin a while ago.. Sorry.
Then if you can provide pictures of the table and carpet right now, that might help build your case... Though it's not uncommon to be able to have photoshop skills. Additionally, theymos has previously said: If you want us to recover a hacked/lost account, you need to prove that you own it. Typically, the only acceptable method of proving ownership is by signing a message (including current date and desired new email address) using a Bitcoin address or PGP key associated with the account. A Bitcoin address or PGP key is associated with the account only if the account posted the key/address, sent it in a PM, or if it is still listed in the account's profile.
I very rarely recover accounts if you can't prove ownership as described above. There are alternative ways of proving ownership, but they take too much time. If I point you to this thread, you can't prove ownership properly, and then I ignore your future PMs, this means that I'm not going to recover your account. Create a new one.
You're probably unlikely to have the account returned. And whoa, it's been a while since this thread was last updated. That's a 9-month break!
How did you lose the private key? (By lose, I mean stopped having access to) |
|
|
|
I recently came back to BitcoinTalk and found that my account had been hacked [not sold].. It's not Amusing.
Anyways, if a mod needs proof to close it, I still have the same old carpet and desk that are shown on my old trade pictures..
KPRIESS HAS BEEN COMPROMISED. DO NOT TRUST IT'S OWNER.
Do you also have access to this address? 1JT6t1ysx18e9xiuoL8TE6zh6pF2jxXCRq If you can, please sign a message using it stating that you, in fact, are the real owner of the account. |
|
|
|
What kind of proof is that? Those blockchain transactions mean nothing. They're just transactions, and there's no context whatsoever. If for example there were screenshots (of before and after preferably) of the transaction history, and you showed the deposit address, then that would make more sense. But the fact that you've only provided these transactions means that there is nothing to see. For all anybody knows, you could have simply lost those bets.
And for the record, I went to secondstrade.com and was looking for those wager addresses, but couldn't find them at all (and these bets are relatively recent, too) *Though the blockchain history does show that those addresses are linked to secondstrade. |
|
|
|
If we decide to keep the existing schedule of increasing the activity by 14 points every other week, we would only need to increase the activity threshold for higher ranks more often (or rather less often for lower ranks). For example, incrementing the activity level required for a Senior Member by 14 would in this case require 4 weeks, within which the threshold for reaching a Hero Member rank will be increased two times by 28 in total (14+14). In this way, we will have the new activity levels set to 254 and 254x2=508, or 240+14 and 480+14+14, for Senior and Hero members, respectively...
- I just started reading this thread. Whoa, whoa. Isn't there a problem here, though? If it takes 4 weeks to increase the Sr. Member activity requirement by 14 and we keep the "doubling" formula, wouldn't it be impossible to reach Hero Member? (Since the requirement increases as equally as the activity given to members directly). It would be +14 to the activity requirement for Hero Members every fortnight, but that's equal to how much activity you receive. Wouldn't it be better to just have a flat rate of adding 14 to the requirement every 4 weeks? (And as you suggested, to the cap of 2x the current requirements)
And now, to change the brainstormed idea. Okay, let's wait and see. I hope the changes proposed here won't be implemented before I become a Legendary Member myself. I somehow sympathize with the low-rank low-activity members who are thinking that only Legendary Members will benefit if this system of increasing activity levels (or something similar to it) starts off for real. But, on the hand, the activity level required for reaching, say, a Hero Member rank looks really ridiculous by now, so a major overhaul of the current system seems to be long due and overdue...
Your previous incremental idea is feasible, I think... But would an increase of 7 activity points to the required amount per rank be better? Older members should only notice it slightly, but this could be a way to block out farmed accounts and the flooding of (Jr.) Member scammers. (Again, at a flat rate for each rank, instead of having the same doubling formula, otherwise ranks would be impossible to reach until the increments are capped) I'm curious who opted for being the Legend in the poll
Most likely not a legendary member.
|
|
|
|
|
Holy crap, this thread is filled with idiots who think they can rattle out money from this situation, creating fake "chilashin friend" accounts.
It's now just become annoying with all the broken english and bolded colored font.
|
|
|
|
Fuck that Bro, i want my 0.18 btc back. already 9 days and still on maintenance? Its sound SCAM for me.
Or are the admin using a 10kbps internet speed to backup?
You should expect to lose your funds when you gamble - any amount that you wager, you accept the fact that the wager can lose. If you're unprepared for loss, then why send the money to the site in the first place?
Have patience - maybe this long wait will make you rethink gambling... probably not. |
|
|
|
If it all comes down to playing the entire game within 30 seconds, which seems to be an insane exaggeration on your part for an online game, then the artificial delays are not required altogether, since the network delays would be both enough and same for human players as well as bots. Changing the difficulty during a match is required to disrupt the pattern which could betray the bot. Obviously, it should be within the limits sufficient to win the match. But I don't think it is actually required, arbitrarily setting the time limits for a move should suffice.
This isn't an exaggeration. I did find a video of Wesley So vs Stockfish (with Stockfish down a knight!) At this point I would agree with you on the bot levels. The only thing I would hope for is that they have basic detection strategies. If there's a consistent winner, then there might be reason for an investigation. Cheating is a problem in Chess, even live! (One grandmaster was caught hiding a phone inside a toilet paper roll during a tournament) I guess at the end of this, I would just hope that any cheaters are stopped - and that the hosts check via engines to really see how the players played based on rating. Cheaters will be caught eventually. That being said... the tournaments for the next few weeks consist of mainly Crazyhouse - a variant of Chess. There is an engine, of course, for it, but its estimated rating is ~2700. It's not difficult to say that a top-tier Crazyhouse chess player would be able to beat or draw against the engine (marginally, perhaps).
And now, anecdotal information! (This is not to improve my point, these are just observations) https://en.lichess.org/@/JannLee - this is the top scoring player in BitChess (3 3rd place wins, 13 2nd place wins, 6 1st place wins) who plays only Crazyhouse on lichess.org, but is streaming the tournaments. You can be sure that that would be something a cheater doesn't do. https://en.lichess.org/@/chickencrossroad - the second top scoring player in BitChess. They have high ratings in many of the variants, and engines have not been developed for some of them - so I strongly suspect that they aren't a cheater. You should do some research yourself on this. Perhaps question BitChess on how they prevent cheaters - I would. (And have!) |
|
|
|
I see that you've had past trade history with Zoomer. Unfortunately, there were two problems with this trade that I would like to highlight for the next few times that you decide to do any marketplace actions: 1. You were trading for a reversible amount. - The problem lies in the fact that PayPal, even if it is sent, can be charged back within 180 days. I know no [sane] escrow would dare to hold that, and that most avoid it unless they're dealing with people they trust. This leads into the second problem.
2. You traded for an amount higher than what you've traded with before - There isn't a problem with this every time, but I typically keep all my transactions equal or less than prior ones (unless I trust them greatly or have good reason i.e. escrow). You posted you bought 5 or 6 Netflix accounts from him, yes? At the price of $1.50 each, that's still <$10, where this trade ended nearly quadruple that.
One last point: They're usually scamming if they ask you for more. Request a refund in that scenario. If they're legitimate, then that's too bad. Get them to reach whatever pre-requisites they must have then do the trade at that point. If they aren't, then you just saved yourself some money.
Not to mention the whole loan thing. Probably leaving + defaulting.
Yeah so foolish of me. Maybe because he was too honest from the start that made me believed in him. Will learn from my mistakes and hopefully the mods and admins can banned zoomer-bitcointalk or Zoomer from this forum for life.
That probably isn't likely to happen. Zoomer is more likely to be banned for insubstantial post quality. |
|
|
|
Related, but not directly.....a coin for the forum. Not a shit coin, but a side chain. Limited supply, perhaps not tradable, that can be used to reward outstanding forum work. Within that side chain, a couple a inner tokens for specific areas, like "development", "coding", "promotion" and even something along the lines of "helpfulness", that last one needs a better name. The coins can be worn as badges of honor and will not be given out willy-nilly. There may even be a few select coins that transfer from person to person, like an employee of the month only more prestigious. Just a thought.
I added a system of badges to SMF a while ago, though only two are defined now. Here are the current badges:  Bitcoin expert | Dev&Tech only. People with this badge know enough about the Bitcoin network to reimplement something very like it from scratch. They are capable of intelligently discussing the Bitcoin network: current protocol, possible attacks, proposed changes, etc. Criteria: Recommendation by an existing Bitcoin expert or core dev and approval by a forum administrator. |  Bitcoin-Qt core developer | Dev&Tech only. These are the core developers of Satoshi's Bitcoin client. They are listed here. Core developers are among the top contributors to Bitcoin-Qt, and they are all bitcoin experts, though they don't also get that badge. |  The Glider(hacker symbol) | Awarded for people who have responsibly disclosed forum security flaws. |
A core dev does not "outrank" a bitcoin expert (or vice-versa), and it's possible for someone without a badge to contribute meaningfully to a discussion with experts and core devs. Hey... there's that exact thing you said! There was, however, talk about a badge or something for people who report posts accurately and consistently (hundreds, not just scores) a while ago to incentivize reporting. Not sure if that's going anywhere. Boom! Found it! Here's the thread. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
