|
Here comes another plummet!
|
|
|
|
someone who doesn't give a damn got hold of a large number of coins??
Markets should not let this happen. Bitcoin looks like a joke
I disagree...all markets should be allowed to fail if so inclined...why prop up a dying/dead system...it would suck to see BTC go down but I don't think that is happening...either its a glitch or someone really just shorted the market...either way I think it will recover. Recovered already... |
|
|
|
|
Someone just made a fortune buying 10,000 bitcoins at $0.01 a piece and it wasn't me!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Its still going, under $9. I wonder how long it'll take for the prices to recover.
EDIT Under $7
EDIT UNDER $1! WHY DON"T I HAVEMONEY IN MTGOX!!!
|
|
|
|
|
This sell off is huge. Holy crap!
|
|
|
|
... I think it may have been a brute-force attack.
Unlikely unless you're sloppy. To prove the point, 10 bitcoin for each pass for any of these unsalted MD5s: 824cfad07c88261afb4dd3285627887a 73550477b12849b2a4dcd3b0db187415 3e567bcbb2aa5c28c47012b857bf6e48 3709fb6b0e1c0b26ff22a19ae92fd080 9133c451dd761d29943dcc653252e2fa ff111d6144367b4abd99aa4321b0a618 8602188ef5a05a13afc59c51b395426c da842aa7c84236d17a04098fa1273f2d Have fun! ;P EDIT: alphanumeric only. I'll pay legitimate finds or my name is mud! Well they aren't in any rainbow tables, so they must be pretty long. Judging by the high reward on this, he probably used 15-20 characters. Enough that you might as well keep your computers mining bitcoins, it could be months even for a very powerful group of computers. |
|
|
|
|
Group luck. The hash per second are derived by how many block we solve in 24 hours, it just fluctuates over time. It does go up pretty fast, so rises are expected. There are times where the entire network doesn't make a block in a whole hour, that will change the number quite a bit, since 6+ were expected.
Nothing to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
There has been an unusual shortage of blocks created recently. It happens every now and then as their creation is random. You'll just need to give it more time.
|
|
|
|
|
It will get confirmed. It just sometimes takes some time. There is no way to cancel it. If in the future you want to get the payment confirmed faster, send a transaction fee, and the miners will give it priority.
|
|
|
|
|
Looking at the API, I was a little concerned by the fact that we are sending passwords in plaintext, and not a hash. I know we are using https, but I do hope that the passwords are not being stored in plaintext? A salted hash is best security practice for storing passwords. A random salt for each user, perhaps generated from their username is best, so that a brute force attack can't be used against everyone at once..
|
|
|
|
The last three months have seen a strong correlation between BTC price and user numbers (growth in user numbers can be estimated from alexa.com, google trends, and forum membership)
That seems perfectly sustainable to me.
Now that bitcoin has been in the mainstream media and most people have heard about it, price is levelling off. I don't see a bubble anywhere.
I think you greatly overestimate that "most people have heard about it". Give it another year. |
|
|
|
|
Welcome to the internet. Most people are treating bitcoin normally watching it unfold naturally, but forums like this attract the polar extremes. I wouldn't look at the forums or blogoshpere as any type of indication as to how bitcoins are fairing, or ever what people really think about them.
|
|
|
|
|
When you load up the backups of different wallets, I recommend running bitcoin with the -rescan option. This will tell bitcoin to ignore how much the wallet "remembers" having and recheck how much it actually has. This way, you don't even have to worry about any of the issues you bring up.
To use the rescan option in windows, alter the shortcut to have -rescan at the end, or open up the command prompt and run the .exe with -rescan at the end.
The problem with the person you mention has nothing to do with the fact that the the coin "had no where to come back to". What happened is that he added a new address to his wallet, and sent the money to that new address. But he didn't back up a file that contained that new key and deleted the new wallet. So he lost the key forever. As long as you send the money to an address you know you have control of, and DO NOT DELETE ANY WALLETS, you should not have a problem consolidating your funds.
Here is what he did:
Made a wallet with one address
Backed up that wallet
Added a new address to the wallet on his hard drive
Sent all the money to that new address
Deleted that wallet on his hard drive
Loaded up his backup that only had the key for the first address not the new address
The main mistake was deleting the wallet. Don't delete any of them, that is the only way to mess up.
EDIT: This wasn't completely his fault, since wallets are suppose to create 100 addresses for you to use, so the second address should have been in the backup, but there was a bug. Still, it would have never have happened if he didn't delete the wallet.
|
|
|
|
|
Wallets just keep track of the addresses you own. The wallet figures out how much it contains by scanning the block chain that the client gets from the p2p system to see which bitcoins are allocated to those addresses. Since scanning the block chain takes a while, each wallet "remembers" the amount of bitcoins that should be in them. But that "memory" has no effect on how much you really have. What you really have is stored on everyone's computer in the form of the block chain. The wallet just contains the keys to unlock them.
To organize yourself, feel free to consolidate all of your funds to one wallet. DO NOT DELETE THE OLD WALLETS, there is no reason to, and if you ever do something wrong it might come in handy. If you load up a backup of an old wallet, it might think you have more then you really do for a little while, but once it finishes updating itself to the current status of the block chain it will realize that those coins have been removed. Any attempt to spend coins that have already been moved will simply be rejected by the system.
A good analogy is to imagine a giant underground vault with trillions of metal safes. You claim one of these safes as your own. In the safe there is a little coin slot, like a piggy back. You give the address of the safe to people who want to pay you. They pay by slipping coins into the coin slot. Your wallet doesn't actually hold any of the coins, it just holds a key to open the safe. Each wallet contains many keys, for many addresses.
Just load up each wallet and send the money to one address that you are sure you have the wallet for. There is no way to "lose" the bitcoins, even if you accidentally double spend. The only way to lose them is if you don't have the right wallet for the address you are sending them to. The only way to lose access is to lose they key, then those fund will be locked there forever.
|
|
|
|
Some people could argue that the best part of love is about touching, but I get your point.  You are confused. That is the best part of sex. Love and sex are not separable. Why do straight people always love straight people, and gays always love gays? Why does nobody has sex with the one but loves the other gender? Thanks Freud. |
|
|
|
I'll leave it to someone else to start a thread on converting famous movie quotes into bitcoin quotes.
I know what you're thinking. "Did he send six bitcoins or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a 6990, the most powerful graphics card in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk? |
|
|
|
Red cross overhead is only 9% according to most charity watchdogs, and a lot of that is outreach. That is pretty low for such a large organization. You shouldn't disparage a good thing.
How can a figure like 9% be derived when they bank money for future use? How can that number be believed with the kind of mishandling of funds they continue to get away with after disasters such as the 89 San Francisco Earthquake, the OKC Bombing, 911, Katrina, Haiti? Red Cross can bank as much money out of donations as they want. They can divert the money to any cause they want. When someone donates money to a cause, they want it spent on that cause, not tossed in the bank so executive salaries and incentives can be guaranteed for years to come. I'll never give money to Red Cross again. There are plenty of charities to give money too, even during major disasters. I don't need the government's official endorsements and telling me who to give to and who to be careful about, and the media advertising for Red Cross. I can do the research myself. I don't give money to ignorantly feel better because I have an official tax right off for "doing good." I actually want to help people. For people just wanting to give money to do good in general, don't just give it to the Red Cross. Find a local charity. These question are why we have dedicated watchdog organizations that make it their business to answer them. |
|
|
|
Remember we live in a civil society and it requires our respect to function well. Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s.
Remember we live in a society where a group of individuals claim the right to point guns at everyone else and it requires our obedience and non-resistence to function well for them. If services provided by the state were so necessary, we wouldn't need to be forced to pay for them. I don't pay taxes because it is utilitarian. I pay because if I don't, they will kill me. Not sure where you live, but I doubt they'll kill you. |
|
|
|
|
Red cross overhead is only 9% according to most charity watchdogs, and a lot of that is outreach. That is pretty low for such a large organization. You shouldn't disparage a good thing.
|
|
|
|
And seriously, you're calling website dealing in conspiracy theories a CIA honeypot? How meta-crazy can you get?
DamienBlack...such a boy scout. It's one thing to be naive, but another to be ignorant and arrogant, which is what you are, unfortunately. Tell me how did building 7 fall into its own footprint like that? No idea what your talking about, but I sure you have a very... believable... explanation with no overt agenda. Didn't mean to be arrogant, just seems like a pretty far-fetched idea. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
